IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2011 / 21ST POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 66 of 2011() ----------------------- SC.97/2010 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-II (NDPS), THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 --------------------------- SURENDRAN.E.E., AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.ITTIATHI, EDAKUDY HOUSE, NERIAMANGALAM.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.DILEEP (KALLAR) RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.PUSHPALATHA M.K. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.66 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of January, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused No.1 in S.C.No.97 of 2010 of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II (NDPS), Thodupuzha for offences punishable under Sections 452, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The alleged incident according to the petitioner, occurred on 26.08.2009 at about 10.15 p.m. and as he claims, he was then undergoing inpatient treatment at Chazhikad Hospital, Thodupuzha having sustained injuries in a motor bike accident the same day at about 8.15 p.m.. Petitioner filed a witness schedule on 28.06.2010 citing Dr.Vincent Stephen of the said hospital to give evidence and to prove a certificate said to be issued by the Medical Officer. Petitioner states that since that witness was reported to be abroad, petitioner took steps to produce documents and other details of his treatment in the said hospital to be proved through the Administrator. Though summons was issued to the Administrator, on receiving summons the Administrator deputed a supervisor to represent him. But the court below without the presence of Administrator stated that the Administrator is not conversant with the signature in the medical certificate and accordingly closed defence evidence and posted the case for hearing. Petitioner therefore seeks to quash Annexure-4, order and permit petitioner mark the medical certificate and out patient treatment card No.63881 in the name of petitioner through the Administrator of Chazhikad Hospital. Crl.MC No.66/2011 2 Learned counsel submits that the said evidence is very material and relevant so far as defence of the petitioner is concerned. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor who took notice for respondent. 2. It is seen from Annexure-4, order that there was a direction to issue summons (obviously to the Administrator of Chazhikad Hospital). But learned Sessions Judge has observed that since the Administrator is not a doctor who is not conversant with the signature in the medical certificate, the supervisor present need not be examined. Having regard to the nature of defence set up by petitioner I consider it necessary and appropriate to give opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence. Hence I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed and Annexure-4, order is set aside. Petitioner is permitted to examine the Administrator and/or Dr.Vincent Stephen (who, learned counsel submits is now available at station) in proof of the medical certificate or, other medical records required to be proved in defence. Learned Sessions Judge shall issue summons to the said witness/witnesses as may be requested for by the petitioner. Crl.M.A.No.153 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. Crl.MC No.66/2011 3 cks