IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 29TH APRIL 2011 / 9TH VAISAKHA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1311 of 2011() ------------------------------------ M.C.NO. 39/2011 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SUNIL.T.JOSEPH, AGED 39, S/O. JOSEPH, THANNIPPARA HOUSE, KORUTHODU.P.O., MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 513. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP BY PUBLICE PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNDAKAYAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J ---------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 1311 of 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of April, 2011 ORDER The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kottayam issued Annexure-A order dated 01.04.2011 in M.C.No.39 of 2011 under Section 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure(for short, “the code”) directing petitioner to appear before that authority on 07.04.2011 and show cause why he shall not be directed to execute a bond. That order is under challenge in this proceeding. Learned counsel submitted that of the three cases mentioned in Annexure-A, order, one has ended in acquittal and two other cases are registered against petitioner as a counter blast for the action. Petitioner took against one Arimaliyil Jose. It is prayed that there is no necessity to initiate action under Section 111 of the Code. It is also prayed that in case this court is not inclined to quash proceeding, petitioner may be permitted to appear before the Sub Divisional Magistrate through his counsel. Learned counsel submitted that on 07.04.2011 petitioner appeared before the Sub Divisional Magistrate through counsel. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. Crl.M.C. No. 1311 of 2011 2 2. In Annexure-A order, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has stated the circumstances under which order under Section 111 of the Code was issued. There is also reference to the various cases in which petitioner is accused and he facing trial before learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kanjirappilly. Annexure A, order directed petitioner to show cause why he shall not be ordered to execute a bond. It is open to the petitioner to show cause against execution of the bond. I do not find reason to interfere with Annexure-A, order. 3. So far as request for exemption from personal appearance is concerned, that is a matter which petitioner has to urge before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. Resultantly, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is closed without prejudice to the petitioner making a request before the Sub Divisional Magistrate for exemption from personal appearance. If any such request is made, the Sub Divisional Magistrate shall consider the request as provided under law and pass appropriate orders. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. ln