IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3800 of 2008() -------------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.168/2008 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------- VIJAYAN R., AGED 50 YEARS, W/O.SRI.RAGHAVAN, PARAMBIL THEKKETHIL, MANAMPUZHA P,O.,KUNNATHOOR,KOLLAM 691 553. BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): STATE & THE ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ENATHU POLICE STATION, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. RENJITH MOHAN, S/O. MOHANDAS, KARTHIKA VEETTIL, PANDALAM THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE, EDAMALI MURI, PARAKKARA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR - R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... CRL.R.P.NO. 3800 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 ORDER Revision petitioner is the defacto complainant before Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor in Crime 168 of 2008. Revision petitioner had originally filed a complaint, which was forwarded for investigation by learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. After investigation, a refer report was filed. Learned Magistrate issued notice to complainant and posted for appearance of complainant on 30.8.2008. On that day, revision petitioner was present. Learned Magistrate accepted the refer report on the ground that no protest complaint was filed. Revision petition is filed challenging the order contending that revision petitioner had sought time for filing a protest complaint and without granting an opportunity, learned Magistrate should not have accepted the refer report. 2. On hearing the learned counsel and learned Public Prosecutor, I do not find it necessary to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate. Petitioner is entitled to file a protest complaint before the Magistrate. If such a complaint is filed, learned Magistrate has to consider the same complying the CRRP 3800/2008 2 procedure provided under Section 200 and 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Revision petition is disposed accordingly. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-