IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2010 / 17TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2559 of 2010() ------------------------- CP.13/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------- DEVAPRASAD.V.KURUP, VISHNU NANDANAM, KAITHA SOUTH MURI, CHETTIKULANGARA P.O., MAVELIKARA-690 106, NOW WORKING AT CRAWFORD MIDDLE EAST L.L.C., DUBAI, U.A.E. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY S.I.OF POLICE PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. UNION OF INDIA, REP.BY THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI. 3. CONSULATE GENERAL OF INDIA DUBAI REP.BY VICE CONSUL GENERAL OF INDIA INDIAN CONSULATGE OFFICE, DUBAI, U.A.E. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S. HRITHICK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.M.C.No. 2559 of 2010 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 8th day of July, 2010 ORDER Petitioner who is the 5th accused in Crime No. 274 of 2009 of Mavelikkara Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 427 and 308 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C. and now pending before the J.F.C.M. I, Mavelikkara as C.P. 13 of 2010 seeks to quash the proceedings on the ground that the petitioner has got the alibi of not being in India on 2-6-2009 i.e. , the alleged date of commission of the offence. 2. The documents produced before this Court are not authentic enough to accept the plea of alibi set up by the petitioner. According to him, he left India for Dubai on 21-5-2009. It is well settled that alibi is a defence which will have to be established by the accused during trial and the burden is also on the accused. In case, the case is Crl.M.C.No. 2559 of 2010 -:2:- committed to the Court of Session, the petitioner may apply for a discharge during the preliminary hearing under Sec. 227 Cr.P.C. by filing a petition through his counsel. The learned Sessions Judge shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioner to consider the discharge. In case a charge is framed against the petitioner and a question of identity does not arise for consideration during trial, the petitioner may file a petition for personal exemption during trial by incorporating appropriate averments and in case the trial judge is convinced about the averments, the petitioner shall be granted personal exemption during trial and his personal appearance shall be insisted in the subsequent proceedings only if it is inevitable. Reserving this right of the petitioner, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of. Dated this the 8th day of July, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) Crl.M.C.No. 2559 of 2010 -:3:- ani.