IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2008 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 10200 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ANEESH T., S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 36 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S.NEW KAIRALI ENTERTAINMENT NET WORK, ADHADI BUILDING, KALOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 673 007. BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN SMT.C.C.JANCY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. P.B.RAVINDRAN, S/O.RAMAN NAIR, POOLADI HOUSE, THIRUVANNUR, KOZHIKODE. 2. KABEER, S/O.ALI KOYA, ARAFA NIVAS, KINASSERY, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- W.P.C.No.10200 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of June 2008 J U D G M E N T The grievance of the petitioner when he filed this petition was that the Sub Divisional Magistrate who had initiated proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C and passed a conditional order Ext.P3 is not continuing with the proceedings methodically, expeditiously and in accordance with law. Notice was given. A statement has now been filed by the respondent. In the statement the details of the proceedings have been given. The report shows that the matter stood posted to 22/5/2008 for filing the report of the Commissioner. The petitioner is not able to explain what happened on that day and thereafter. Originally, the case stood posted to 29/5/2008. It was advanced on the basis of the orders passed by this court on 27/3/2008. It is thereafter that the case was posted to 8/5/2008 and to 22/5/2008, it is seen from the statement filed. 2. It is for the petitioner now to appear before the learned Magistrate and raise all his contentions. I have no reason to assume that the assertion in the statement filed that W.P.C.No.10200808 2 the case was advanced to 8/5/2008 and stood posted to 22/5/2008 awaiting the Commissioner's report is not correct. If the petitioner has any grievance on the Commissioner's report, it is for the petitioner to appear before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and raise such objections. The petitioner must now participate in the enquiry before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and raise all contentions there. The petitioner has a further grievance that though an interim order was passed and the petitioner had filed a counter to that application for interim order no orders have been passed on such application so far. The petitioner can appear before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and pray for early disposal of that application and the vacation of the interim order passed. Needless to say, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has to consider such request also and pass appropriate orders on that application for interim order expeditiously. 3. With the above directions, this writ petition is allowed in part. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr W.P.C.No.10200808 3 W.P.C.No.10200808 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007