IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4174 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- C.C.NO.68/2007 OF CJM COURT, ERNAKULAM ................ PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------- NANDAKUMAR, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. VISWANATHA PAI, AZAD ROAD, PATTERIPURM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4174 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2009 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.380 IPC. The crux of the allegations is that he, who as an employee of the Federal Bank had access to the ATM operated by the bank, had clandestinely removed 227 currency notes of five hundred rupees denomination from the ATM operated by the bank. 2. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Trial has not commenced yet. When the matter was posted for trial, the petitioner wanted certain documents to be made available to effectively cross-examine the officials of the bank who were expected to appear and give evidence. He filed an application calling for as many as 9 documents. The application was Crl.M.C. No.4174 of 2008 -: 2 :- opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor and thereupon, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, after anxiously considering all the relevant aspects, passed the impugned order under which the request to summon document No.7 was allowed; but the request to summon documents 1 to 6, 8 and 9 was dismissed. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. According to the petitioner, the refusal of the learned Magistrate to summon those documents would certainly impair the ability of the petitioner to establish his defence. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and the bank may be directed to produce all the documents. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find absolutely nothing to indicate that the documents summoned are not relevant to the issues which are likely to arise in the trial. The learned Public Prosecutor, in the course of discussions, submits that the prosecution has no objection in those documents being produced before court. 4. That the documents are voluminous, that they may be required for the day-to-day activities of the bank etc., are the objections which the bank may raise when they receive Crl.M.C. No.4174 of 2008 -: 3 :- summons. Only when such objections are raised by the bank, need the court consider those objections. I may observe that if the learned Magistrate finds that the documents are necessary and relevant for the proper conduct of the case of the petitioner, the learned Magistrate may/can direct the bank to produce photocopies. If the objections of the bank is against the conduct of the trial in open, trial can be directed to be held in camera. The request of the bank to retain the originals after producing certified copies of such documents as also the request to keep them confidentially in sealed covers can also be considered by the learned CJM. 5. At any rate, I find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the out right rejection of the prayer to summon those documents is not justified. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that this Crl.M.C. deserves to be allowed and the impugned order deserves to be set aside. 6. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. (b) The impugned order is set aside. (c) The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall issue summons to C.W.1 to produce the 9 documents referred to in the impugned order. Taking into account the objections, if any, to be Crl.M.C. No.4174 of 2008 -: 4 :- raised by such witness, appropriate further orders can be passed by the learned Magistrate. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge