IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3511 of 2008() ------------------------------------------- ST.205/2008 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE - I, ERNAKULAM. .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------ V.C.BABU, S/O. V.A.CHACKO, AGED 49 YEARS, ATTOLY HOUSE, S.R.M. ROAD, KOCHI 18. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENT(S): STATE ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... CRL.R.P.NO. 3511 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 ORDER Petitioner is the complainant in S.T.205 of 2008 filed alleging commission of an offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act against one P.L.Asokan. Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Ernakulam dismissed the complaint under Sub-section (4) of Section 204 of Code of Criminal Procedure recording that petitioner was absent and there was no representation and no steps were taken. Revision petition is filed against the order. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. Case of the petitioner is that complaint was filed before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam and Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence and later it was transferred to Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Ernakulam and there was no notice to the petitioner and therefore he could not make any representation when the case was called on 19.4.2008 and in such circumstances, the order is to be set aside and an opportunity is to be granted. It is also submitted that as the transfer was not known, petitioner did not produce the stamped envelope necessary to issue summons to the accused and CRRP 3511/2008 2 petitioner is prepared to produce the same as and when directed. 3. As the complaint was dismissed under Section 204 of Code of Criminal Procedure, before issuing summons to the accused, it is not necessary to issue notice to the accused in the revision. In the interest of justice, petitioner is to be granted an opportunity. 4. Revision petition is allowed. The order dismissing the complaint dated 19.4.2008 is set aside. S.T.205 of 2008 is restored to file. Petitioner is directed to take steps as directed by the Magistrate within ten days from today. If no steps taken, learned Magistrate is at liberty to proceed under Section 204 of Code of Criminal Procedure. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-