IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2481 of 2009 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22/05/2009 CMP.2951/2009 IN CC.343/2007 IN of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-IV, KOZHIKODE ............................................ PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- ABDUL HAMEED, AGED 55 YEARS, SUHARA MANZIL, ARAKKINAR PO, CHAKKORIKAD, OP.MATHOTTAM, VIJITH THEATRE, CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ANEESH K, S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBOODITHIRI, AGED 31 YEARS, ANASWARA, PO.CHOOLUR NIT VIA, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BYTHE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2481 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 29th July 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.343/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Kozhikode. This petition is filed to quash Annexure-A4 order passed on 17/6/2009 dismissing the application for re-opening the case. As is clear from Annexure-A4 order C.M.P.2951/2009 with the same prayer was filed and it was allowed on cost and in spite of granting three chances for payment of cost. It was not paid. Consequently it was dismissed. It is thereafter C.M.P.4270/2009 was filed. Learned Magistrate was justified in finding that attempt of the petitioner is only to protract the trial. It is evident from the fact that the copy application challenging that order was passed only on 25/6/2009 and even though order was received by the petitioner on 8/7/2009, this petition is filed only on 28/7/2009. In such circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with CRMC 2481/09 2 that order. Petitioner is entitled to challenge the order along with the final order if warranted. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.