IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 872 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CRMP.181/2010 & 202/2010 IN C.C.4/2004 of SPL. JUDGE (SPE/CBI)-I, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ ANANTHA NARAYANA BHATT, S/O.LATE NARAYANA VADHYAR, AGED 60 YEARS, VIII/1146, RESIDING AT T.D.SOUTH EAST STREET, KOCHI-682 022 AND WORKING AS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S.ANIT MARINE AGENCIES PVT. LTD., INDIRA GANDHI ROAD, WELLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI-682 003. BY ADV. MR.C.S.MANU, MR.S.K.PREMRAJ. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, KOCHI BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI, KOCHI BRANCH, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRY,SC, C.B.I. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.872 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 24th March 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the fifth accused in C.C.4/2004 on the file of Special Judge (CBI)-I, Ernakulam. At the defence evidence stage petitioner filed Crl.M.P.181/2010 (Annexure-A2) to re-open the defence evidence and to summon the bank manager to tender evidence on the documents produced. Central Bureau of Investigation filed Crl.M.P.202/2010 for re-calling PW6 to mark the credit slips. By Annexure-A1 order learned Special Judge dismissed both the petitions. Fifth accused filed this petition to quash Annexure-A1 order. Though respondent did not challenge the order dismissing Crl.M.P.202/2010, learned Crmc 872/2010 2 counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that if Crl.M.P.181/2010 is to be allowed Crl.M.P.202/2010 is also to be allowed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has no objection for allowing Crl.M.P.202/2010 also. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the petition was dismissed by the learned Special Judge on the ground that this court has directed to dispose the case by order dated 24/1/2006 within one year, and periodical extensions were obtained and on 6/1/2009 extension was granted with the observation that it is the last chance for compliance and on 21/12/2009 extension was again made for three months. The submission is that it is only because of the time fixed by this court for disposal learned Special Judge did not grant permission to the petitioner to Crmc 872/2010 3 prove the documents produced subsequent to the closing of the evidence and therefore, the order is to be quashed. 3. Documents sought to be proved by the petitioner are the communications sent by Bank to the loanees. It cannot be said that the sending of such notices are not relevant aspects to be considered while deciding the correctness of the defence case. In such circumstances, learned Special Judge was not justified in dismissing the application on the ground that time limit has been fixed by the High Court and it was extended from time to time and finally extended for three months on 21/12/2009. 4. The power under Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure is very wide. If the court finds that for a just decision of the case it is necessary to summon and examine Crmc 872/2010 4 witnesses it has to be done. In such circumstances, Annexure-A1 order is quashed. Special Judge(CBI)-I, Ernakulam is directed to re-consider Crl.M.P.181/2010 as well as Crl.M.P.202/2010 afresh and if the documents sought to be proved are relevant and necessary to have a just decision in the case opportunity must be granted to the parties to adduce evidence. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.