IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4593 of 2010() -------------------------------------- CRL.M.P.245/2009 IN CC. 124/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE II, ADOOR. CRRP.143/2009 of SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED --------------------------------------- N.S.SUNIL KUMAR, ANIKADU HUOSE, POOVARANI.P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN.V.ALAPATT RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. M.R.RAJENDRAN NAIR, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. RAMA KURUP, SOUPRANIKA, KULANADA.P.O., KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010, ALONG WITH CRMC. NO.4594 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4593 & 4594 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 7th day of December,2010 ORDER Accused in C.C.124/2009 & 126/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- II,Adoor filed these petitions challenging the order passed by the learned Magistrate in Crl.M.P.245/2009 & 246/2009 passed on 20.6.2009. Both the petitions were filed under section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure by petitioner the accused at the defence evidence stage to reopen th evidence. Petitioner challenged those orders before Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta in Crl.R.P.143/2009 and Crl.R.P.142/2009 which were respectively dismissed on 30.1.2010 and 8.2.2010 on the ground that no revision will lie. Even thereafter petitioner did not challenge the Crl.M.C.4593 & 4594 of 2010 2 order passed by the learned Magistrate immediately. These petitions are filed on 19.11.2010 after 11 months of disposal of the revision and 1 ½ years after the disposal of the order in the interlocutory application. In such circumstances, I do not find that it is for this court to entertain the petitions. Petitioner is entitled to challenge the order in the interlocutory application along with the final judgments, if judgments go against him. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006