IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER, 2011 / 28TH ASWINA, 1933 Crl.L.P..No. 1221 of 2008 --------------------------------- [AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 9.9.2004 IN CC.290/2003 of THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II,PATHANAMTHITTA] .................... PETITIONER/ COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------- SHAN RAJ, PARACKAL HOUSE, VAKAYAR.P.O, KONNI. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH RESPONDENTS(S): STATE & ACCUSED -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. G.PRADEEP KUMAR, KYPPALLIL VEEDU, PUNALUR. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA. THIS CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, ALONG WITH CRLP NO. 1222 OF 2008, CRLP NO. 1223 OF 2008, CRLP NO. 1224 OF 2008 AND CRLP NO. 1225 OF 2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.L.P.Nos. 1221, 1222, 1223, 1224 & 1225 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2011 O R D E R As the above five leave petitions are being considered together by this Court and the petitioner except in Crl.L.P.No.1223 of 2008 is the same, but the same counsel is appearing for all the above petitioners, these petitions are heard together. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that though he had obtained two weeks time on 8.8.2011 to get instructions from the petitioners to cure the defect and though contacted the petitioners, no instruction is given. 2. From the proceedings of this Court in the above cases, it appears that the present leave petition was filed belatedly and subsequently, by order dated 21.8.2008, this Court directed the petitioners to produce the order sheet/proceedings paper maintained by the Magistrate from the date of cognizance to the date of the impugned order. The said order was passed on 21.8.2008. It is, CRL.L.P.NO.1221 of 2008 & connected cases :-2-: thereafter, the matter being adjourned either for the non-representation of the petitioner or at the request of counsel for the petitioner. It was thus finally on 8.8.2011, the counsel sought two weeks time to get instructions from the petitioner. But, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that no instruction is received from the petitioners. As the proposed challenge is against the acquittal of the accused, in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and from the conduct of the petitioners, it appears that they are not interested in prosecuting this petition. Therefore, these leave petitions are dismissed for non-prosecution. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge MBS/ CRL.L.P.NO.1221 of 2008 & connected cases :-3-: V.K.MOHANAN, J. CRL.L.P.No. OF 20 CRL.L.P.NO.1221 of 2008 & connected cases :-4-: O R D E R Dated:2. ..2011