IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1548 of 2002(B) ------------------------------ CC.353/2000 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THODUPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------- DHANWANTHARI VYDYASALA, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER ANOOP, DHANWANTHARI VYDYASALA, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED ---------------------------- 1. DR.NJANADAS, S.M.HOSPITAL, MEENAMKAL P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.AMJETH ALI. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.1548 OF 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of April 2008 ORDER The complaint filed by the petitioner against respondent No.1 herein, alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that he had failed to take steps to serve summons to the accused. On the day when the complaint came up for consideration the complainant was absent also. The amount involved in the case is Rs.7,610/-. According to the complainant, he had attempted to serve notice on the respondent on eight or nine occasions, but of no avail. Notice issued from this court to respondent No.1 also could not be served since he was not available in station. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the court below. Therefore, the revision petition is dismissed. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) jes