IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2011 / 24TH POUSHA 1932 CRL.A.No. 30 of 2010() ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN ST.4072/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRTE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------------------- K.T.FRANCIS, S/O.THOMAS, KAVUNGAL HOUSE, CHEMBUKAVU VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN SRI.P.V.BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED ------------------------------------- 1. P.Y.PAULSON, S/O.YESUDASAN, PALLIPORATHUKARAN HOUSE, CHIYYARAM, THRISSUR. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R1 SRI.RAJAN VELLOTH FOR R1 SRI.SAIJO HASSAN FOR R1 SRI.A.S.SABU FOR R1 SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN FOR R1 SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI FOR R1 SRI.V.K.RAFEEK FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A SALIM THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sou. K. HEMA, J ---------------------- Crl.Appeal.No.30 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated 14th January, 2011 J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed challenging the order of acquittal passed under section 256(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' for short). 2. Appellant is the complainant. He filed a complaint against first respondent alleging offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The case was taken on file in the year 2005 and it was posted to different dates for evidence. On one such day after lapse of four years of filing the complaint, appellant was absent and accused was acquitted as per the impugned order dated 30.10.2009. 3. Heard appellant's counsel. There is no representation for first respondent. On hearing the appellant's counsel I am satisfied that accused was acquitted under section 256(1) of the Code on the date on which case was posted for evidence. In the light of the decision reported in 2010 (4) KLT 697 P.V. Joseph Vs. State of Kerala and another such acquittal is illegal. Crl.A. No.30/10 2 Hence order under challenge is liable to be set aside and I do so. 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 28.2.2011. This appeal is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.