IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3934 of 2007() ----------------------------------------- CC.816/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VADAKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------- KOMATHKUNI AHAMMED HAJI, S/O.MAMMU, VAIKILASSERY AMSOM, VARISSAKUNIL DESOM, VADAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.A.HARISH RESPONDENTS/ ACCUSED AND STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. MOIDU, S/O. MOOSA, VEMPARA HOUSE, VALLIKAD. 2. ABOOBACKER, S/O. KUNHIPARIYEYI, NEDUNTHERI HOUSE, CHORODE AMSOM, DESOM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV. SRI.M.ASOKAN FOR R1, R2 ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J. FOR R1, R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, ALONG WITH CRRP NO. 3983 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ........................................... CRL.R.P.NOs. 3934 & 3983 OF 2007 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 ORDER These revision petitions are filed by the complainant in C.C.816 of 2004, who is the defacto complainant in C.C.505 of 2004 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vadakara. The revision petitions are filed challenging the order of acquittal of the accused for the offence under Section 506(i) read with 34 IPC in C.C.816 of 2004 and the insufficiency of the sentence awarded in both the cases. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondents submitted that Crl.A.566 of 2007 and Crl.A.567 of 2007 are pending before Additional Sessions Court, Vadakara filed by respondents/accused challenging the conviction in C.C.505 of 2004 and C.C.816 of 2004. It is submitted that as both these revision petitions are to be heard along with the appeal, the revision petitions may be transferred to Additional Sessions Court, Vadakara, to be heard with Crl.A.566 of 2007 and Crl.A.567 of 2007. Learned counsel appearing for revision petitioners also submitted that revision petitions may be transferred to Additional Sessions Court, Vadakara. It was also CRRP 3983/2007 & CON. 2 pointed out that joint trial of the two cases was illegal. 3. As the judgment challenged in these revision petitions are challenged in Crl.A.566 of 2007 and Crl.A.567 of 2007, transfer the revision petitions to Additional Sessions Court, Vadakara to be heard along with Crl.A.566 of 2007 and Crl.A.567 of 2007. Revision petitioners are entitled to challenge the legality of the joint trial also before the Sessions Court. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk/-