IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2010 / 16TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3833 of 2010() ------------------------------------- MP.1061/2010 IN CC.608/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KOCHI .................... PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ ANZAR, S/O.HASSAN BAVA, HAJIYARUKUDI VEEDU, MALIPURAM KARA, KADAPURAM BHAGOM, ELAMKUNNAPUZHA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.A.S.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3833 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 8th October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the second accused in C.C.608/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kochi filed an application under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure to dispense with his personal appearance at the time of trial. By Annexure-A order, learned Magistrate dismissed the petition finding that presence of the petitioner is necessary for the purpose of framing charge. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A order. Petitioner has not produced the application filed by him before the learned Magistrate, seeking dispensing with his Crmc 3833/10 2 presence during trial. 2. From Annexure-A order it is clear that what was sought for was not to dispense with his presence on the date when charge is to be framed, but for the entire trial. Argument of the learned counsel is that as the petitioner is in Mumbai, he may not be in a position to appear before the Court personally for answering the charge and therefore, presence of the petitioner is to be dispensed with and he must be permitted to plead through his counsel. 3. Petitioner is at liberty to approach the learned Magistrate for limited purpose of pleading through his lawyer and to dispense with his presence for that Crmc 3833/10 3 purpose. If such a petition is filed learned Magistrate to pass orders in accordance with law. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.