IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2011 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2712 of 2011() ------------------------------------------ CRL.MP.1934/2011 IN CC.252/2009 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, ALUVA .................... PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED ----------------------------------------- E. GAFOOR, S/O. IBRAHIM, C.C.23/542, K.M.P. NAGAR, PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JEEVAN MATHEW MANAYANI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. DETECTIVE INSPECTOR, CBCID, ERNAKULAM, (CRIME NO.75 OF 1997 KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION (139/CR/97). 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS STATE PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEENA R. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2712 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANX.A1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.C. 390 OF 1997 OF THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II, ALUVA DATED 25-9-2002. ANX.A2 TRUE COPY OF CHARGE SHEET IN C.C. 390 OF 1997 REFILED AS C.C. 1255 OF 2002 RENUMBERED AS C.C. 252 OF 2009 AND C.C. 252 OF 2011 OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II ALUVA. ANX.A2A TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE A2 ANX.A3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF CRL.M.C. WITHOUT THE ANNEXURES IN CRL.M.C. NO.2109 OF 2011. ANX.A4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL. M.C. 2109 OF 2011 DATED 13-07-2011. ANX.A5 TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE DATED 6-7-2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P No.2712 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of November 2011 ORDER Challenge in the revision is by the accused in C.C No.252/2011 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class -II, Aluva against the order dated 10-10-2011 passed by the learned magistrate declining his plea for discharge. He was prosecuted with some other accused for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 326 r/w 34 IPC. At the time when the trial proceeded with the coaccused, he was not available and thereupon splitting up the case against him the trial continued as against the other accused, which ultimately ended in their acquittal. Subsequently, when the split up case against the petitioner proceeded with the above C.C No.252/2011, he approached this court and moved a Crl.M.C seeking for quashing the proceedings. By Annexure A4 dated 13/07/2011 expressing a view that the continuation of the trial against the petitioner would not serve any purpose this court directed the magistrate to consider plea of discharge of the accused if any application thereof is moved within one month thereof. The petitioner/accused, however, moved the application after the time granted by this court. The magistrate, therefore, turned down his request for discharge under the Crl.R.P No.2712 OF 2011 2 impugned order. Challenge in the revision is against that order. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in moving the application was solely on account of the reason that the court remained closed for considerable period. Petitioner was misled and was not given proper advice that he could have move the application before the court which had charge over the court concerned when it remained closed, is the submission of the counsel. Counsel seeks indulgence of this court for appropriate direction/order to the court below to consider his application. Having regard to the observations made in Annexure A4 order by this court in Crl.M.C No.2109/2011 and also the submissions made by the counsel as aforesaid, vacating the impugned order, I direct the magistrate to take back the Crl.M.P 1934/2011 on the file and dispose the same on its merits. Revision disposed of. Sd/- vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A to Judge