IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 81 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CRL.M.P.NO.5848/2008 IN SC NO.351/08 OF SESSIONS COURT,ERNAKULAM APPELLANT:COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY T.P.RAMESH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.N.SUKUMARAN RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------- VINOD, S/O.SATHYAVAN, VALIYAMPARAMBIL VEEDU, PUTHUVYPE KARA, PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.81 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January 2009 O R D E R The State claims to be aggrieved by Annexure III order. Prosecution under Section 376 I.P.C is pending before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam. It has been made over to the VI Additional Sessions Court. The offence alleged is the one punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. The State wants the trial to be held before a woman Presiding Officer in the interests of justice. Instead of filing an application under the judicial side under Section 408 Cr.P.C or an application under Section 409 Cr.P.C on the administrative side, the State appears to have filed an application before the Bench before which the case was pending. That Bench, by Annexure III order, held that it is not within its province to grant the relief. 2. Of course, the presiding officer of the court could have addressed the learned Sessions Judge for action under Section 409 Cr.P.C. In not doing so, the presiding officer has committed no legality. The petitioner/State has the option under Section 408 Cr.P.C or 409 Cr.P.C to move the learned Sessions Crl.M.C.No.81/09 2 Judge. I find absolutely no justification in the prayer filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. There must be order and discipline in proceedings before court. The petitioner/State has got to take resort to the provisions of Section 409 or Section 408 Cr.P.C to secure the relief in the interests of justice. 3. With the above observations, this petition is dismissed. Needless to say, the learned Sessions Judge must pass appropriate orders before the date, if any scheduled for trial. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.81/09 3 Crl.M.C.No.81/09 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008