IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 496 of 2008() ----------------------------- CC.61/2006 of ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... REVN. PETITIONER: COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------------ A.MARIAN, S/O. ALPHONSE, AGED 70 YEARS, R/AT ELANGALOOR HOUSE, N.T.V.NAGAR, H.NO.50, KADAPPAKADU P.O., KOLLAM-691 008. BY ADV. SRI.TOM JOSE SMT.GEETHA JOB(OZHUKAYIL) SMT.P.KRISHNAPRIYA SMT.P.PADMAPRIYA SMT.NAJUMA BAI NAZEER SMT.S.SREENI RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED AND STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MARY VARGHESE, W/O. A.G.VARGHESE, R/AT CC 33/567, A/1 FLAT NO.6-A-1, GROUND FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD COLONY, OPP. INTERNATIONAL STADIUM, KALOOR, KOCHI-25. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.R.P.No.496 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th day of February, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, who is the complainant in C.C.No.61/2006 on the file of the Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Ernakulam in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 involving a cheque for a sum of Rs.36,100/-, challenges the order dated 6.12.07 passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing the complaint under Section 204 (4) Cr.P.C for failure on the part of the petitioner to deposit the process fee. 2. Since the compliant was dismissed even before the appearance of the accused before the court, notice to the respondent- accused in this revision is dispensed with. 3. It is true that there has been some latches on the part of the complainant. But still, being a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the learned Magistrate should have been indulgent in giving the petitioner adequate opportunity to remit the process fee, particularly when the case, which was initially filed before the J.F.C.M-II Crl.R.P.No.496 of 2008 2 Ernakulam, was subsequently, transferred to the court below. Accordingly the impugned order is set aside and C.C.No.61 of 2006 shall stand restored to file. The petitioner shall appear before the court below on 13.03.08, by which time he shall have remitted the process fee for the further progress of the complaint. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj