IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2008 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 745 of 2001 ----------------------------------- CC.443/1998 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-V, TRIVANDRUM .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------- V.RAMAKRISHANAN NAIR S/O M.R.VASUDEVAN NAIR KULATHOOR NEYYATTINKARA BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.) RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. O.RATHI DEVI T.C.28/907 KARTHIYANI VILAS KAITHAMUKKU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP FOR R1 SRI.S.MANU FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.745 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of May 2008 ORDER Petitioner was examined as a defence witness in a prosecution initiated by respondent No.1 herein against the Printer and Correspondent of a Malayalam Daily alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The two accused who have been arraigned in the private complaint before the trial court, have not been impleaded in this revision petition. 2. It appears that after examination of the petitioner as DW1 in the case, the learned Magistrate passed an order directing that the petitioner also be impleaded in the array of the accused by invoking the power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner contends that the above order passed by the learned Magistrate is manifestly illegal, irregular and unsustainable either in law or on facts. 3. Sri.Nandakumara Menon, learned senior counsel, while inviting my attention to the provisions contained under Section 319 of the Code contends that the learned Magistrate was not justified in directing the petitioner to face trial along with the two accused in the case presumably on the basis of certain statements made by him Crl.R.P.No.745 OF 2001 :: 2 :: in the course of his examination before the court as a witness. Learned senior counsel has taken me through the deposition of the petitioner. 4. Having heard learned senior counsel and having perused the materials available on record, I am of the view that petitioner has to urge all contentions available to him in his defence before the trial court itself. In the absence of any patent illegality or irregularity in the procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate, I do not deem it just or proper to invoke the revisional jurisdiction of this court at this stage. I am persuaded to take the above view, particularly since I have gone through the deposition of the petitioner/DW1. I refrain from making any comment or observation in this regard, especially since learned senior counsel submits that he would advise his client to take up all the defences available to him before the trial court itself. In that view of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the contentions raised by the petitioner, revision petition is closed. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) jes Crl.R.P.No.745 OF 2001 :: 3 :: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.R.P.No.745 OF 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ORDER Dated 30th May 2008