IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 50 of 2008() --------------------------- CC.357/2006 of C.J.M.,THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: -------------------------------- 1. SURESH, AGED 38, S/O.BHASKARAN, NIRANAKKUDIYIL VEETTIL, AANIKKADU KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE. 2. SHAJI, AGED 32, S/O.VARGHESE, KUZHIKKANDATHIL VEETTIL, POOTHAKKUDI, AANIKKADU KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE. 3. SHIYAS, AGED 25, S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, CHANTHALAKKUNNEL HOUSE, AANIKKADU KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE. 4. RAJESH, AGED 25, S/O.RAMANAN, PANGAN PARAYIL VEETTIL, AANIKKADU KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE. 5. MANOJ, AGED 27, S/O.NARAYANAN, PONNATUTHUMKUDIYIL VEETTIL, CHAVARA NAGAR, VAZHAKKULAM, MANJALLOOR VILLAGE. 6. JAMES @ KUNJUMON, AGED 29, S/O.PAPPAN, PALLIPPARAMBIL VEETTIL, AAVOLI KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE. 7. RAJAN, AGED 27, S/O.RAJAN, CHIRAKKAL VEETTIL, AAYAVANA KARA, ETHANELLOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.SARATHKUMAR SRI.S.RAJKUMAR RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/A2: -------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE IN CRIME NO:21/04 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 45, S/O.NARAYANAN, LATHA NIVAS, RAMAMANGALAM KARA, MARADI VILLAGE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tr.P.(Crl).No. 50 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners are accused in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 461 and 380 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken. The matter has reached the stage of trial. At this stage, the petitioners/accused have come before the court with a prayer that the case may be ordered to be transferred to any court having jurisdiction. 2. Report of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was called for. In the report the learned Magistrate submits that CW1 is not a practicing lawyer before that court and at no time either before appearance or after appearance as CW1 she ever appeared as a counsel before that court. The learned C.J.M. reports that the learned Magistrate will not be able to identify CW1, though the records show that she had once appeared before that court. 3. Notice issued to the defacto complainant has not been served and returned so far. I am in these circumstances satisfied Tr.P.(Crl).No. 50 of 2008 2 that the plank on which the claim for transfer is made gives way and the request for transfer cannot be entertained favourably. 4. This transfer petition is accordingly dismissed. (R. BASANT) Judge tm