IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2009 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 872 of 2009() ------------------------ CRA.546/2007 of THE SECOND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, KOLLAM) .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SINI.S., SINI NILAYAM, PADINJATTE KIZHAKKU, SOORANAD NORTH P.O., SOORANAD BY ADV. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. KRISHNAKUMAR K.C., S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, KOCHUVEETTIL, KOTTACKAPURAM MURI, KLAPPANA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- CRL.M.C.No. 872 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of Marach, 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to the Second Additional District Court, Kollam to dispose of the Crl. Appeal No. 546/2007 within a time frame. The petitioner herein had an order in her favour passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sasthamcotta which is appealed against by the respondent and there is a stay granted by the Sessions Court regarding the implementation of the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is not having any other residence and stay of the operation of the order causes her considerable difficulty. When the operation of the order is stayed the parties revert back to the original position and the party who has won in one court faces handicap. At the same time if the court is convinced about the incorrectness of the order and stayed the order, then it is a matter which requires consideration. So either way there must be a consideration of the stay application on merits and if the court feels it is better to Crl.M.C. 872/09 -2- consider the appeal rather than stay application independently, it is for that court to decide and consider either the appeal or the stay application. 2. Therefore I dispose of the Crl.M.C with a direction to the petitioner to move an application for an early hearing and the court below shall either consider the stay application on merits and pass orders or if it is found it is better to dispose of the appeal itself, do it so after hearing both sides. The Crl.M.C is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm