IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 4057 of 2011() ------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15/11/2011 IN CRMP.655/2011 IN SC.38/2011 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------------------- VENUGOPAL, S/O. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, ANCHU BHAVAN VEEDU, KODUKULANJI KAROD MURI, VENMONY VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Scl. Crl.MC.No. 4057 of 2011() APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE 1: TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 3.11.2011 IN CRL.MP 655/2011 IN SC NO.38/2011 OF ASST. SESSIONS COURT, CHENGANNUR, FILED BY PETITIONER. ANNEXURE II: TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION IN CRL.M.P. NO.655/2011 IN SC 38/2011 DATED 5.11.2011. ANNEXURE III: COPY OF ORDER IN CRL.M.P NO.655/2011 IN SC NO.38/2011 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, CHENGANNUR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE Scl. P.S. GOPINATHAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------------- Crl. M.C. No. 4057 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2011 ORDER This petition is filed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure assailing Annexure III order dated 15.11.2011 in S.C No.38/2011 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Chengannoor. The petitioner who is the 2nd accused applied for exemption for personal appearance. The offence alleged is under Sec.55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act. The Assistant Sessions Judge dismissed the petition mainly noting that the petitioner had violated the order of this court and also had noted some manipulation in the Vakalath and affidavit. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner would not be disputing the identity and that he has not at all violated any of the order of this court and no manipulation was created, either in the Vakalath or affidavit. The petitioner is working abroad and that he would appear before the trial court as and when the case is taken up and sought for permission to go abroad. 2. Having due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the submission of the petitioner that he would appear before the Crl. M.C. No. 4057 of 2011 2 Assistant Sessions Judge as and when the case is taken for trial may not be possible if he goes abroad. However, having due regard to the nature of the offence and that the number of the witnesses to be examined is not much I find that it would be appropriate to direct the Assistant Sessions Judge to dispose of the case within a time frame so that the petitioner can go abroad on completion of the trial. In the above circumstances, this petition is disposed of. The Assistant Sessions Judge, Chengannoor is directed to give priority to the case and finish the trial at the earliest, not later than 15/1/2012. P.S. GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. Scl.