IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 580 of 2009() ------------------------ CC.1061/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- T.A. ABRAHAM, AGED 39, S/O. T.A. ANTHRAYOSE, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE, KANNANACHIRA KARA, VAKATHANAM, CHANGANASSERRY. (PRESENTLY WORKING AT INDORE) BY ADV. SRI.BIJU HARIHARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS(STATE)& DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, 2. NISHA. M. JOHN, AGED 34, D/O. E.V. JOHN, VALIPPARAMBIL HOUSE, MULLASSERRY KARA, PERUMBAYIKKADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JAOCB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- CRL.M.C.No. 580 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009 O R D E R This application is filed to quash Annexure A1 order by which bail bond of the accused has been cancelled and notice has been issued to the sureties. It is submitted that on account of the engagement of the lawyer before this court the counsel entrusted to represent the case was not able to be present before the court on account of a traffic jam. The proceedings paper were produced before this court which would equally show that complainant is also not at all eager to have a disposal of the matter and the court has been forced to issue even a non bailable warrant against prosecution witness. I am informed that the accused were permanently exempted from appearing, but the court was forced to cancel the bond when there was no appearance by the counsel even. Now the concerned advocate has given sufficient reason for his absence on that particular date and he has also stated that there is no intention to deliberately stay away from the court especially when the court has been Crl.M.C. 580/2009 -2- considerate in permanently exempting the accused from personal appearance. For the unavoidable absence of the lawyer, the petitioner need not to be put to hardship. 2. Therefore I set aside the proceedings dated 10.12.2008 and direct the court to recall the non bailable warrant. In order to meet the ends of justice, if possible, atleast one of the accused shall be directed to be present through the learned counsel for the accused on one day and thereafter the said permanent exemption will continue and the counsel appearing for the accused should be more vigilant in making proper representation before the court. With these observations the Crl.M.C is disposed of. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm