IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3183 of 2005() ------------------------------ CMP.2782/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THIRUVANANTHAPURUM .................... PETITIONER-COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------ M/S.RELIANCE CAPITAL LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT VILLAGE MEGHAT/PADMA, TALUKA LALPUR, DIST.JAMNAGAR, GUJARAT 361 280, AND ALSO HAVING TRIVANDRUM BRANCH AT D.P.I.JUNCTION, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS P/AT. HOLDER SRI.VENKATESH PRABHU. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN RESPONDENTS-ACCUSED: --------------------------- 1. BHANUCHANDRA.P., T.C.41/458, KURIYATHI, MANACAUD (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY SRI. THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN, P.P. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2008 ALONG WITH CRL.RP NOS. 3182 & 3181 OF 2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- Crl.R.P. Nos. 3181, 3182 & 3183 OF 2005 --------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008 ORDER These criminal revision petitions had arisen out of the dismissal of the complaint by the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thiruvananthapuram, in CMP Nos.2781/04, 2779/04 & 2782/04. All these cases were filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is submitted that it was represented by the junior counsel. But the learned Magistrate did not grant time and proceeded to dismiss the complaint. The Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, should have used his discretion to permit the party to get themselves examined as contemplated under the law and should have given some time instead of throwing out the complaint in the threshold level itself. Therefore, the order of dismissal of the above CMP’s are set aside. They are directed to be restored to the file and an opportunity be given to the revision petitioner herein to proceed with the case. I also direct the revision petitioner to co-operate with the court for examination or filing the affidavit, as the case may be. The criminal revision petitions are disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps 2