IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 3RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 12TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1683 of 2010(A) -------------------------------------- [C.M.P.NO.8631/2009 IN C.M.P. NO. 65/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT,KODUNGALLUR] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- NAJUMA.V.Y, VALIYAKATH HOUSE, KAIPPAMANGALAM,VAZHIYAMBALAM, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SUDHEER,S/O.VALIYAKATHU YUSAF, PANAMBIKUNNU DESOM, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DIST. 2. SHEREEFA,W/O.ABDULLAKUTTY, PANAMBIKUNNU DESOM, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DIST. 3. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A.SALIM, R2 BY ADVS. SRI.N.AJITH, SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1683 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner filed C.M.P.No.65/2009 before Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kodungallur to call for the original of the promissory note marked in O.S.No.408/2007, as, according to the petitioner, it is a forged document. Learned Magistrate, by Annexure-III order, directed the petitioner to take steps to get the original from the court by substituting a certified copy and produce the same in court. 2. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that promissory note was not produced by the petitioner before the civil court and it was produced by the first respondent, who is the plaintiff in that suit. Only the person who produced it in court can get it back and petitioner, the defendant in the suit, cannot get it. Therefore, on the face of it, CRMC 1683/10 2 Annexure-III order is not sustainable. Moreover, when the allegation is that promissory note is the product of forgery and the original document is necessary for trial, learned Magistrate was not justified in passing Annexure-III order. 3. Annexure-III order is quashed. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodungallur is directed to consider Annexure-II petition afresh and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, after hearing the parties. Petition is disposed. 3rd September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv