IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1949 of 2008(F) ------------------------- CRMP.8705/2007 of J.M.F.C.-III,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. G.BHARATHAN, T.C.6/2314, LATHA BHAVAN, VATTIYOORKAVU P.O., THITTAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUDHEER.B., T.C.6/2314, LATHA BHAVAN, VATTIYOORKAVU P.O., THITTAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY STATE PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. S.RAJESH KUMAR @ MURUKHAN, S/O.SASIDHARAN NAIR, KONATHU, THITTAMANGALAM, KODUNGANOOR P.O., VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J ...................................... W.P. (C) No. 1949 of 2008 - F ...................................... Dated: 17-01-2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners who are father and son are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in a private complaint instituted by the 2nd respondent herein before the J.F.C.M. III, Thiruvananthapuram alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 232, 294 (b) and 506 (1) read with Sec. 109 of I.P.C. The Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences and the case has been taken on file and numbered as C.C. No. 316 of 2005. Upon receipt of summons, the petitioner entered appearance through counsel and filed Ext.P5 application as Crl. M.P. No. 8505 of 2007 under Sec. 205 Cr.P.C. seeking permanent exemption from personal appearance and permission to be represented through their counsel. The apprehension of the petitioners is that the Magistrate may dismiss the W.P. (C) No. 1949 of 2008 - F -:2:- application and insist upon the appearance of the petitioner before the Magistrate on all the dates of postings. W.P. (C) is disposed of directing the J.f.C.M.III, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of Ext.P5 application (Crl.M.P. Bo. 8505 of 2007) bearing in mind that the physical presence of the accused may be necessary during the trial and until the commencement of examination of the witnesses the physical presence of the accused may not be necessary and even during trial it is only if the question of identity arises or when the Magistrate insists on the presence of the accused should he direct the accused to be present before court. The accused cannot thereafter complain that the evidence was recorded in their absence. This Writ Petition is disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE).