IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 7TH JANUARY 2008 / 17TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 73 of 2008() ----------------------- CC.761/2006 of JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-I (FOREST OFFENCES), THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SUNNY MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, PUTHIYEDATH HOUSE, THODUPUZHA KARA, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. BABY THOMAS, PUTHIYEDATH HOUSE, NEELOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 7-01-2008 THE COURT ON 07/01/2008 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.M.C. No. 73 of 2008 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 07-01-2008 ORDER In the nature of allegations in the petition, notice to the first respondent/complainant is dispensed with. 2. Petitioner is the accused in C.C. 761 of 2006 on the file of the J.F.C.M. - I, Thodupuzha for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in respect of a cheque for a sum of Rs. 5,45,000/-. One of the defences raised by the petitioner is that there were three borrowals covered by three cheques and on his discharging the liability under the cheques two of the cheques were returned but the third one allegedly misplaced by the complainant, one was misused for prosecuting the petitioner. According to the petitioner, eventhough he had made sufficient suggestions to the complainant examined as P.W.1, regarding the return of two of the cheques, since the returned cheques were then misplaced, he could not produce the same or confront with P.W.1 with the cheques and he had subsequently traced out the cheques and proposes to confront P.W.1 with the same after re-opening the evidence in the case which stands posted for hearing. There is no reason to assume that the Magistrate will shut out relevant evidence if the same is necessary for a proper disposal of the case. With the above observation, this Crl. M.C. is disposed of. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani.