IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER, 2011 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA ,1933 CRL.A.No. 2135 of 2011 ------------------------------- (AGAISNT THE ORDER IN CC.205/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, MUVATTUPUZHA ) .................... APPELLANT(S)/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- N.GOPALAKRISHNAN, PAZHAMPILLUKUDIYIL, VAZHAPPILLY,MUDAVOOR P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ELIAS RESPONDENTS(S): ------------------------- 1. BIJU MATHEW, CUNDANGAYIL HOUSE, MUVATTUPUZHA P.O, ADOOPARAMBU 695 301 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA.T.Y. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.A.No. 2135 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The complainant in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I.Act') is the appellant since he is aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.5.2008 in C.C.No.205 of 2008 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Muvattupuzha by which the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 256(1) of the Cr.P.C. 2. Heard the counsel for the appellant. I have perused the judgment of the trial court impugned in this appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the cheque in question covers an amount of `.20,000/-. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that originally, the complaint was filed in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I. Muvattupuzha wherein cognizance was taken and C.C.No.584 of 2006 was instituted. But, subsequently, the case was made over to the Judicial CRL.A.NO.2135 of 2011 :-2-: First Class Magistrate Court-II, Muvatupuzha wherein the case is renumbered as C.C.No.205 of 2008 and the counsel was not aware of the transfer of the case to the present trial court. 4. I am unable to accept the above contention of the learned counsel that the case was made over or transferred to the present trial court without the knowledge of the parties and the counsel concerned. Normally, when a case is transferred or withdrawn from a court to another court, the same will be notified in the notice board of the court concerned. In the present case, the appellant has no case that such a practice was not adopted in the court below. However, I am not proposed to probe into those aspects at this stage. It is beyond dispute that the cheque in questions covers an amount of `.20,000/- and the court has already taken cognizance for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and the accused has entered appearance. But, there is no decision on merit. In such a situation, according to me, one more opportunity can be given to the appellant to prosecute CRL.A.NO.2135 of 2011 :-3-: the case on merit and to have a decision thereon. But, because of the the laches on the part of the appellant, such an opportunity can be given only on terms. In the result, this appeal is disposed of setting aside the order dated 20.5.2008 in C.C.No.205 of 2008 of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Muvattupuzha on condition that the appellant/complainant deposits a sum of `.1500/- (Rupees One Thousand Five Hundred only) in the trial court i.e., Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Muvattupuzha within one month from today. Accordingly,the appellant/complainant is directed to appear before the trial court on 16th January,2012 on which date the learned Magistrate is directed to restore the above case on file and on his satisfaction that the appellant/complainant deposits the amount as ordered above, proceed with the trial of the case in accordance with the procedure and law and dispose of the same on merit. On the appearance of the accused, a sum of `.1000/- shall be paid to him out CRL.A.NO.2135 of 2011 :-4-: of the above amount which would be deposited by the appellant and the remaining amount of `.500/- shall be deposited in the State Exchequer. As the case pertains to the year 2008, the learned Magistrate is directed to expedite the trial of the case and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge MBS/ CRL.A.NO.2135 of 2011 :-5-: V.K.MOHANAN, J. CRL.A.No. OF 20 CRL.A.NO.2135 of 2011 :-6-: JUDGMENT Dated:2. ..2011