IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : MONDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 CRL.A.No. 1941 of 2007() ------------------------ CC.704/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KOLENCHERRY .................... APPELLANT: COMPLAINANT ---------------------- T.M.BABY, THOTTAPPILLIL HOUSE, S/O. MATHAI, AGED 54, VADAYAMPADY P.O., PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED & STATE ---------------------------- 1. N.S.VIJAYAN, NADUVATH HOUSE, VADAYAMPADY P.O., PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM. 2. M.N.MOHANAN, MANAKKANDATHIL HOUSE, ARACKAPPADY, VENGOLA, PERUMBAVOOR. 3. ABDUL HAKKIM K.K., CUCKOO VILLA, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANJUMMEL P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) FOR R1 SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI FOR R1 SMT.SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH FOR R1 SMT.SMITHA GEORGE FOR R1 SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR FOR R3 SRI.P.VISWANATHAN FOR R3 R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.A.No. 1941 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT The appellant is the complainant in a private complaint filed alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 420 I.P.C. When the case came up for hearing on 22.7.2008 the petitioner and his counsel were not present. Absence was noted and the complaint was dismissed under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was prosecuting the complaint diligently before the JFMC, Kolencherry. 2. Earlier the case was pending before the ACJM, Ernakulam. After the case was received by the JFMC, Kolencherry the petitioner had not received notice. He was out of the State in connection with his work. The appellant's wife had received the notice, but the appellant could not appear in time before the Court. It was in these circumstances that the case was dismissed on 22.7.2008. The learned counsel for the Crl.A.No. 1941 of 2007 2 appellant prays that a lenient view may be taken and the appellant may be given an opportunity to prosecute the complaint and substantiate his contentions. There are other cases between the parties pending before the JFMC, Kolencherry now. The respondent has entered appearance. The application is opposed. 3. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am persuaded to agree that the appellant/complainant can be given an opportunity to further prosecute his complaint. Specific directions can be issued. Notwithstanding the opposition by the respondent, I am satisfied that the prayer can be allowed. 4. This appeal is allowed. The impugned order of acquittal and dismissal of the complaint is set aside. The JFMC, Kolencherry is directed to dispose of C.C. 704 of 2006 afresh in accordance with law. Both sides shall appear before the JFMC, Kolencherry on 11.8.2008 to continue further proceedings. The learned JFMC, Kolencherry shall ensure that this case, which is seen filed as early as in 2003, is disposed of as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six months from 11.8.2008. (R. BASANT) Judge tm Crl.A.No. 1941 of 2007 3