IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2011 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3217 of 2011(D) ------------------------- CC.16/2010 of JFCM III KOTTARAKARA .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED ----------------------------------------- K.MURUKAN, S/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, SUDHA MANDIRAM, KOKKADU, KOKKADU.P.O., CHAKKUVARACKAL, KOTTARAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.T.T.RAKESH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.C.KUTTAN PILLAI, KUZHIYIL VEEDU, KIZHAKKEKARA, KOTTARAKARA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA. 691506 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PIN-682 031. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN FOR R2 ADV. SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No. 3217 of 2011(D) APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE 1: A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION DATED 09.06.2011. ANNEXURE 2: A TRUE COPY OF THE DISMISSAL ORDER DATED 24.06.2011 BY JFCM III, KOTTARAKARA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE. N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No. 3217 of 2011 . ------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th October, 2011. ORDER This application is filed by the accused to permit the learned counsel to cross examine PW1. Proof affidavit was filed by the complainant on 07.01.2011. On that day he was not cross examined by the counsel appearing for accused. It was then adjourned to 01.02.2011 for examining the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Then the accused filed an application to recall PW1 for cross examination. That petition was allowed and adjourned to 29.04.2011. On that day PW1 was not cross examined. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 29.04.2011 there was a harthal. But the learned counsel for respondent stated that there was no harthal on 29.04.2011; but the harthal was on 21.04.2011. Then again a petition was filed to reopen the evidence for the purpose of recalling PW1 and to cross examine him. That petition was rejected by learned Magistrate. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner that an opportunity may be given to the accused to cross Cr.M.C.No.3217 /2011 2 examine PW1. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that though proof affidavit was filed in January 2011 only because of the dilatory tactics adopted by the accused the case could not be disposed of even after ten months. However, one more opportunity has to be given to the accused to cross examine PW1. But it could be only on terms. The petitioner shall deposit Rs. 8,000/-(rupees eight thousand) on or before 10.11.2011 and if the said amount is deposited the learned Magistrate will allow PW1 to be cross examined by the learned counsel for the accused on the next hearing date itself and the case shall be disposed of at the earliest. If the complainant succeeds in his case the aforesaid sum of Rs.8,000/-(rupees eight thousand) shall be released to him immediately. N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, (Judge) Kp/-