IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 184 of 2009() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 1134/08 IN ST.241/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - III, KOLLAM AND CMP 1135/08 IN ST.240/07 OF J.F.C.M-III,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. B.M.RAMESH KUMAR MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S PEARL PET PACKINGS PVT.LIMITED OLD NO. 27, FIRST MAIN ROAD, FIRST FLOOR KARPAGAM GARDENS, ADAYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. 2. RADHIKA, W/O.B.M.RAMESH KUMAR DIRECTOR, M/S PEARL PET PACKINGS PVT.LIMITED OLD NO. 27, FIRST MAIN ROAD, FIRST FLOOR KARPAGAM GARDENS, ADAYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. 3. M/S PEARL PET PACKINGS PVT.LIMITED OLD NO. 27, FIRST MAIN ROAD, FIRST FLOOR KARPAGAM GARDENS, ADAYAR, CHENNAI 600 020. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SRI.D.RAJENDRAN, MANAGING PARTNER M/S. LAJPATHI PACKERS, ASRAMAM,KOLLAM-2. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.184 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January 2009 O R D E R Petitioners face indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. They hail from Tamil Nadu. They appeared before the learned Magistrate through counsel and prayed that they may be exempted from appearance in tune with the directions in Jain Babu v. Joseph [2008(4) KLT 16]. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, allowed the application. The operative portion of the order reads “Therefore appearance of the accused dispensed with till the hearing”. Seeing this order, the petitioners have rushed to this court. The petitioners are not able to make out the precise date till which they are exempted from appearance. What the learned Magistrate intends by the expression “till hearing” is not very clear. Hence they have preferred this Crl.M.C. 2. I find the grievance to be not of much substance though the operative portion is not very specific. I am satisfied that it can be clarified by me that the petitioners need appear before the learned Magistrate only when specifically directed by Crl.M.C.No. 184/09 2 the learned Magistrate and such specific direction for personal appearance can and need be issued only in terms of the dictum in Jain Babu (Supra). 3. With the above observations this Crl.M.C is dismissed. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No. 184/09 3 Crl.M.C.No. 184/09 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008