IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 4653 of 2007() ------------------------------ CC.677/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TALIPARAMBA .................... REVN. PETITIONER: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------ P. JAYASEELAN, MANAGING PARTNER, GRANT EARTH MOOVERS BORE WELLS AND TIPPERS, TALIPARAMBA. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENTS: STATE & ACCUSED: ----------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.K. DINESH BABU, KANDOTH HOUSE, KOTTOOR, KADACHIRA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ---------------------- Crl.R.P.No.4653 of 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of January 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A complaint was filed and the same was pending before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thaliparamba on 27/11/2002 to 13/10/2004. Summons was served on the accused; but he was absent. There was a direction to issue non-bailable warrant to the accused on 26/5/2004. The said direction was repeated on 14/7/2004 and the case was posted to 13/10/2004. On 13/10/2004 the complainant was absent. No process fee was paid and in these circumstances the learned Magistrate proceeded to dismiss the application under Section 204(4) Cr.P.C. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been seriously prosecuting his complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The cheque is for an amount of Rs.98,500/-. It was not a case where the petitioner was not interested in the prosecution of his complaint. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed Crl.R.P.No.4653/07 2 before me the order sheet for the period from 27/11/2002 to 13/10/2004. The unfortunate omission to take steps to issue the non-bailable warrant occurred on account of reasons beyond the control of the petitioner, a lenient view may be taken and the petitioner may be given an opportunity to prosecute his case, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am persuaded to accept the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner. I am satisfied that the omission on the part of the complainant who has been properly prosecuting his complaint all along can be condoned and he can be given a further opportunity to prosecute his complaint. 7. In the result: a) This revision petition is allowed. b) The impugned order is set aside. c) The learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of C.C.No.677/03 afresh in accordance with law. d) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate on 01/03/2008 to continue the proceedings. The petitioner shall take all necessary steps for issue of process on or before that date. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.R.P.No.4653/07 3 Crl.R.P.No.4653/07 4 R.BASANT, J C.R.R.P.No. ORDER 21ST DAY OF JULY 2006 Crl.R.P.No.4653/07 5