IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 3RD ASWINA 1930 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 63 of 2008() --------------------------- CC.111/2008 of J.M.F.C.,IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER(ACCUSED) ---------------------------------- C.S.SURESH, CHAMAMPATHALIL HOUSE, T.P.PURAM P.O., VAZHOOR, KOTTAYAM (WRONGLY SHOWN IN THE COMPALINANT IN C.C.111/08 AS CHAMAMPATHALIL HOUSE, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM) BY ADV. SRI.JOHN BRITTO SRI.C.A.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. SURESH KUMAR, S/O. GOPI, ODATTIL HOUSE, PURAMATTUKARA, CHITTILAPPILLY, TRICHUR REPRESENTED BY HIS PRESENT POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER KARTHIK C.K.,AMBADY HOUSE, P.O.THICHIOOR, VARAVOOR VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Tr.P. (Cri) No. 63 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial has already commenced, it is submitted. The complainant has not been cross-examined. The matter stands posted for 313 examination. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ill and, in these circumstances, it is not possible for him to appear before the learned Magistrate at Irinjalakuda on all dates of trial. The petitioner resides in Kottayam District and, in these circumstances, there may be a direction to transfer the case to any other court of competent jurisdiction in Kottayam District. 2. I find no merit in the prayer made. At this stage, when the trial has already commenced, I find absolutely no Tr.P. (Cri) No. 63 of 2008 -: 2 :- justification in the prayer for transfer. It has already been held and general directions have been issued as per an order in Crl.M.C.No.1977/07 dated 4/9/2008 that it is not necessary to insist on the personal presence of the accused for a proper disposal of the prosecution under Sec.138 of the N.I. Act. The petitioner can claim advantage of that order and claim exemption from appearance. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was noted by the learned Magistrate that the complainant has not been cross-examined and the petitioner wants to file an application to recall the complainant. The petitioner can do the same and without insisting on the personal presence of the petitioner the learned Magistrate must consider such application on merits and pass appropriate orders. 4. With the above observations, this transfer petition is dismissed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Tr.P. (Cri) No. 63 of 2008 -: 3 :-