IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 CRL.A.No. 993 of 2005() ----------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRLP.281/2005 Dated 17/05/2005 CC.572/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KAYAMKULAM .................... APPELLANT: COMPLAINANT ------------------------- A.JAMALUDEEN, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, MALIAKAIL HOUSE, NEAR FACT, CHERAVALLY, KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SRI.R.SREEDHARAN NAIR SRI.M.S.NISHAD SMT.SABINA JAYAN RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED AND STATE -------------------------------- 1. G.SANTHOSHKUMAR, S/O.GOPALA PILLAI, PUTHENPURACKAL,(MANJAZHETHU VADAKKETHIL), GOVINDAMUTTOM P.O., KAYAMKULAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR ADV. SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR FOR R1 SRI.S.MOHANAN FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J ---------------------- Crl.Appeal.No.993 OF 2005 ----------------------------------- Dated 20th January, 2011 J U D G M E N T This appeal arises from the order of acquittal passed under section 256(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short). 2. Appellant filed a complaint against first respondent before the Magistrate Court alleging offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The case was taken on file in the year 2002. It was posted for evidence to different dates. In the meantime, case was sent to Lok Adalat and no settlement could be arrived at. Case was posted thereafter on 24.12.2004. Petition was filed for adjournment, on behalf of the complainant. The petition was dismissed and accused was acquitted, recording that there was no representation. 3. Appellant's counsel was absent. There was no representation for appellant. Though first respondent entered appearance, there was no representation for first respondent also. Heard learned public prosecutor. On going through the order Crl.A. No.993/05 2 under challenge and the averments in the appeal memo, it appears that case was pending before the trial court for a period of two years and it was posted for evidence to different dates. The case having been posted for evidence, the accused ought not have been acquitted under section 256(1) of the Code, in the light of the decision reported in 2010 (4) KLT 697 P.V. Joseph Vs. State of Kerala and another. In the result the following order is passed: (i) The order under challenge is set aside. (ii) The trial court shall take the case on file and dispose of the same in accordance with law. (iii) The parties shall appear before the trial court on 07.03.2011. The appeal is allowed. Sd/- K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou. // True copy // P.A To Judge.