IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2010 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 689 of 2010() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 5636/09 IN CC.771/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,KOYILANDY .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ K.P.GOKULDAS, S/O.CHATHU, AGED 59 YEARS, MARAKADANILAM VEEDU, ERANHIKKAL P.O., ELATHUR AMSOM, MOKAVOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673 303. BY ADV. MR.NIRMAL. S RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS & STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JAYABHARATHI A.T., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, W/O.DINESAN, ANGANVADI TEACHER, ANGANVADI NO.33, VAZHAKKAPURATH THAZHATH, ERANHIKKAL P.O., MOKAVOOR, KOZHIKODE-673 303 (ELATHUR POLICE STATION LIMIT). 2. MR.CHANDRAMOHAN, I.C.D.S.OFFICER, CHELANOOR, KOZHIKODE. (KAKKOOR POLICE STATION LIMIT). 3. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.689 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 8th April 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the complainant in C.C.771/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Koyilandy. Case is being tried as warrant trial. When evidence was recorded as provided under Section 244 of Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner filed Annexure 6 petition, (C.M.P.5636/2009) under Section 93 of Code of Criminal Procedure to direct search so as to seize the original of Annexure 2 receipts contending that those receipts are necessary to prove the case. By Annexure 5 order, learned Magistrate dismissed the petition holding that as no steps was taken to show that the documents were issued from District Social Welfare Crmc 689/10 2 Office, search cannot be ordered. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure 5 order and to direct the Magistrate to order search. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. Argument of the Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the very case of the petitioner is that Annexure 1 receipts/vouchers, though purported to be issued by the petitioner, were not issued by him and the signature seen in the documents are not his signature and Annexure 1 receipts were received by the petitioner from District Social Welfare Officer, on an application filed under the Right to Information Act and original of those Crmc 689/10 3 documents are necessary to prove his case and on production of original documents, petitioner is entitled to get them examined by an expert and in such circumstances, learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing the application. 4. Though Annexure 6 application does not show that petitioner has to get the original of Annexure 1 receipts examined by an expert, Annexure 2 complaint shows that the very case of the petitioner is that those receipts were not issued by him. In such circumstances, learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing the application by Annexure 5 order for the reason that there is nothing to show that Annexure 1 receipts were issued from the District Social Welfare Office. Annexure 1 shows that Crmc 689/10 4 the documents were furnished to the petitioner, on an application filed by him dated 23/5/2007. In such circumstances, Annexure 5 order is quashed. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Koyilandy is directed to re-consider Annexure 6 application and pass orders in accordance with law. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.