IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3067 of 2005(A) ----------------------------- [CC.NO.1063/2001 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM] .................... PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- SAILESH MOHAN SHARMA, DIRECTOR, M/S.RAM BAHADUR THAKUR LTD., II MAIN ROAD, WILLINGTON ISLAND, COCHIN-682 003. BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA, SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN, SRI.TERRY V.JAMES. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M/S.APPLE CREDIT CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED AGENT MR.ABDUL NASEER, ASSISTANT OFFICER RECOVERY, CHOICE TOWERS, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN-682 016. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.T.JOSE, R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. B. VINOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.M.C. NO.3067/2005-A: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE-A: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE R.1. BEFORE THE HONOURABLE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT AT ERNAKULAM DTD. 01/02/2001. ANNEXURE-B: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 02/03/98 OF THE COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI. ANNEXURE-C: COPY OF THE PROPOSAL FOR JOINT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT DTD. NIL. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. B.P. RAY, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 3067 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011. O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioner is the 3rd accused in C.C. No. 1063 of 2001 on the file of the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. I am not inclined to quash the charge at this stage. It is open to the petitioner to raise all relevant points before the trial court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this being a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, personal appearance of the petitioner may not be insisted upon. It is for the petitioner to file an application under Section 205 Cr.P.C before the trial court. If such an application is filed, the personal appearance of the petitioner may be dispensed with on such terms and conditions the learned Magistrate deems fit. The trial of the case be expedited. This Crl.M.C is disposed of as above. sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE. rv