IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 7TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3670 of 2008() ------------------------- ST.757/2006 of J.F.C.M COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .................... PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: --------------- R.ANIL, ASWATHY, SREE CHITRA NAGAR, PANGODE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, (REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER B.P.RAJAN, S/O.BHAGAVATHY PILLAI, T.C.7/1195, ASWATHY, PANGADE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR SRI.HARIKUMAR.S. RESPONDENT/ACCUSED & STATE: ---------------' 1. S.K.THANKARAJ, SOUGHAGYA, MELE CHERUKARA VEEDU, POOJAPPURA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3670 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September 2008 O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is the power of attorney holder of the complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Though the complaint was filed as early as in 2002, the presence of the accused could be secured only on 17/7/2008. When the accused so appeared before court, he allegedly raised a complaint that the power of attorney holder threatened the accused in the courtyard of the court. Thereupon the learned Magistrate passed an order dated 17/7/2008 directing the complainant to appear in person and tender evidence. Matter stands posted to 30/09/2008 for appearance of the complainant. The complainant is abroad. He is unable to appear. In these circumstances, the power of attorney holder has rushed to this court with this petition. He prays that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked and the direction to the complainant to appear in person may be set aside. The complainant will not be able to appear on 30/09/2008 and it is apprehended that the complaint may be dismissed under Section 256 Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No.3670/08 2 2. I find the grievance of the petitioner to be justified. Assuming that the power of attorney holder had indulged in the alleged objectionable conduct, the court can certainly proceed against the said Power of Attorney holder in accordance with law for the indiscretion committed by him. But, I am, at a loss to understand how that conduct can justify a direction to the complainant to appear in person. I am unable to support the impugned order. I am satisfied that the same warrants interference. In the circumstance of the case, I am satisfied that it is not necessary to wait for issue and return of notice to the accused. 3. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C is allowed. b) Direction issued by the learned Magistrate to the complainant to appear in person is set aside. c) Further proceedings can go on with the power of attorney holder representing the complainant. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) Crl.M.C.No.3670/08 3 jsr Crl.M.C.No.3670/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008