IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN SATURDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2011 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3815 of 2011() ----------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP.6467/2011 IN ST.459/2010 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S)/COMPLAINANT :- ------------------------------------------------- M/S.KADAYIL FINANCIERS, THANGASSERI, KOLLAM-691007, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MANUEL CRUZ DARWIN, THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY, WILLIAM, RESIDING AT KADAYIL HOUSE, MULAKKAL PARAMBU, THANGASSERY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED :- ----------------------------------------- 1. JAYA @ JAYAKUMARY, D/O.INDIRAMMA, JAYABHAVANAM, CENTRE NAGAR-61, PUNNATHALA CHERRY, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM-691012. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI. K.SIJU FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt Crl.MC.No. 3815 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :- ANNEXURE I: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, ST 459/2010 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM DATED 15-6-2009. ANNEXURE II: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED NIL IN ST 459/2010 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM. ANNEXURE III: TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION IN ST 459/2010 BEFORE THE CJM, KOLLAM DT.22-8-2011. ANNEXURE IV: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.22-8-2011 IN CMP 6467/2011 IN ST 459/2010 BEFORE THE CJM KOLLAM. ANNEXURE V: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CJM, KOLLAM. ANNEXURE VI: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 4-10-2011. ANNEXURE VII: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 17-10-2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.3815 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of December 2011 O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant submits that the complainant was present on almost all the hearing dates and that he was ready to give evidence. But only because his father expired, he was not in a position to give evidence on two dates to which it was posted. In fact the complainant was present on 1.9.2011 and 4.10.2011 also. The leaned counsel for the complainant submits that complainant is ready to give evidence on the next posting date itself either through the power of attorney holder or by the complainant directly. Since it is always just and proper that the case is disposed of on merit, it is necessary to give opportunity to the petitioner. Hence this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The complainant will appear before the Crl.M.C. No.3815 of 2011 -: 2 :- learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam on 4.1.2012. The complainant will take all steps necessary for the due prosecution of the case. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt