IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 18TH BHADRA 1932 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 45 of 2010() ------------------------------------ SC.256/2009 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-II, THODUPUZHA C.C. NO.149/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVIKULAM. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 3 ------------------------------------------------------- 1. PUTHRAN, S/O.CHEENIMUTHU, RESIDING AT KGP VII/335, THEERTHAMALAKUDIYIL, KARSSANADU KARA, KANTHALLOOR VILLAGE. 2. ALLIMUTHU, S/O.CHEENIMUTHU, RESIDING AT KGP VII/350, THEERTHAMALAKUDIYIL, KARSSANADU KARA, KANTHALLOOR VILLAGE. 3. RAMADEVAN, S/O.CHOKKAYAN, RESIDING AT KGP VII/348, THEERTHAMALAKUDIYIL, KARSSANADU KARA, KANTHALLOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.J.JOSEMON SRI.MATHEW SKARIA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- T.P. (CRL).NO.45 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 9th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners, the accused in S.C.256/2009 on the file of Additional Sessions Court-II, Thodupuzha filed this petition to transfer the case to some other court after the attempt to get it transferred to another Sessions Court was found futile by dismissal of Crl.M.P.3795/2010 passed in Annexure-IX order. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel is that opportunity was not granted to examine the second witness in the witness T.P.(Crl).45/10 2 list who is an official witness and in such circumstances, there is no fair trial. Annexure-IX order of the learned Sessions Judge itself shows that petitioners did not furnish the correct address of the witness to issue summons and in such circumstances, the evidence was closed. Whether closing of the evidence is justifiable or not, is not a matter to be considered in this petition filed for transfer. If petitioners are aggrieved by that order, remedy is to challenge that order. It is not a ground to order transfer as sought for. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.