IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3774 of 2011() ------------------------- CC.1591/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I,CHALAKUDY .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 ------------------------------------------- 1. DIALEN LOUIS, S/O.LOUIS, CHERUPUNATHIL HOUSE, P.O.KADUKUTTY, KALLOOR, VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE. 2. JANCY LOUIS, W/O.DIALEN LOUIS, CHERUPUNATHIL HOUSE, P.O.KADUKUTTY, KALLOOR, VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT NO.1 ------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION, CHALAKKUDY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P.SMT.S.HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX (CRL.M.C.3774 OF 2011) PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN CRL.M.C.1073/2011 DATED 1.4.2011. ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF PETITION FOR PERMANENT EXEMPTION PETITION AS CMP NO.8419/2011 DATED 25.6.2011. ANNEXURE A3: TRUE COPY OF ORDER AND PROCEEDINGS DATED 1.9.2011. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3774 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of November, 2011 Order The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in CC No.1591/2007 on the file of JFCM Court, Chalakkudy. As directed by this court, they appeared before the court below. They were released on bail on 12.5.2011. The bond was executed on 16.5.2011. Thereafter the petitioners did not appear in court. But on earlier dates they were represented through counsel. On 1.9.2011, the petitioners were absent. There was no representation. Hence, the learned Magistrate cancelled the bail and notices were issued to the sureties. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that only because the counsel appearing for the accused could not reach the court in time, warrant was issued by the learned Magistrate. It is also submitted that a petition filed on behalf of the accused under Section 205 Cr.P.C. was not disposed of by the learned Magistrate though it was so directed by this court earlier. The learned counsel submits that the petitioners will definitely appear before the court on Crl.M.C.3774/2011 2 8.11.2011. It is also submitted that first accused is having physical disability to the extent of 60%. The petitioners will convince the learned Magistrate that their absence on 1.9.2011 was not deliberate but only because the counsel could not reach the court in time. The learned Magistrate will certainly appreciate that plea raised by the accused and dispose of their application on the same day. Since the case is of the year 2007, the learned Magistrate will see that the case is disposed of at the earliest. Needless to say, the accused should co-operate with the learned Magistrate to have an early disposal of the case. The accused should be present at the time of trial if the identity is disputed. They should undertake that they will certainly appear for examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd Crl.M.C.3774/2011 3 Crl.M.C.3774/2011 4