IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2010 / 7TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3536 of 2009(V) -------------------------- ST.4151/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT I, TIRUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- V.P.AHAMMED,S/O.VEERAN, VALAPPILKUNDIL HOUSE,KUZHIMANNA P.O., KONDOTTY (VIA),VAZHAKKAD. BY ADV. MR.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAZHAKKAD,THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. V.P.UMMER HAJI,S/O.KUTTY MOIDEEN HAJI, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE,EDAYOOR P.O., VALANCHERI POLICE STATION. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.BHAVADASAN, J. --------------------------- Crl.M.C No.3536 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- ORDER Petitioner seeks to have Annexure A3 order quashed and for an order that his personal appearance be dispensed with. 2. Petitioner was the accused of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears that a summons was send which had been refused. Therefore, the court issued warrant. It is only after proceedings under Sections 82 and 83, were resorted to, petitioner appeared through a counsel. He then wanted to recall the warrant and to exempt him from personal appearance in support of CMP No. 7601/2009. That Petition was dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this court has taken a view that normally in cases falls under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act exemption used to granted from personal appearance. It may be so, but this case stand on a different footing. From the order, it is seen that the accused had refused acceptance of summons and therefore the court had issued warrant. In the circumstance, the principle urged by the learned counsel may not have any application. Crl.M.CNo.3536 OF 2010 Page numbers 4. No grounds are made out to interfere with the order. In case the petitioner appears before the court and files an application for bail, the learned Magistrate shall dispose it of in accordance with law on the same day itself. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// vdv P.A TO JUDGE