IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2010 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4818 of 2010() ------------------------------------- CMP.1479/2010 IN ST.1363/2006 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-IV, NEDUMANGAD. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- SUCHITHRA R.BABU, W/O.RAJENDRA BABU, AGED 36 YEARS, ARA-215-A, "SIVAKRUPA", NEAR CHEMPAZHANTHI SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, ANIYOOR, CHEMPAZHANTHI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM NOW RESIDING AT "PRABHATHAM", KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.MANOJ P.KUNJACHAN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PREMNATH. P., "ASWATHY", EAST BUNGLOW, (KIZHAKKKE BANGLAVIL), NEDUMANGAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4818 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner, the accused in S.T.No.1363/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-IV, Nedumangadu, filed C.M.P.No.1479/2010 under Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure. It was allowed on cost. When the case was posted for examination of the witnesses and payment of cost, recording that petitioner was not ready and willing to pay the cost and cost was not paid as directed, the petition, which was originally allowed, was dismissed by Annexure-D order. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-D order. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. In the nature of the order to be passed, I do not find it necessary to issue notice to the first respondent, the complainant before the learned Magistrate. 4. Annexure-B, copy of A Diary proceedings, shows that both the complainant and the accused were absent CRMC 4818/10 2 and they were represented by a counsel. Case of the petitioner is that as complainant was not present, cost could not be paid and learned Magistrate dismissed C.M.P.No.1479/2010 at the roll call itself and petitioner was ready and willing to pay the cost, but there was nobody to receive the same. Petition is allowed. If petitioner deposits Rupees One thousand before Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-IV, Nedumangadu and files an application to receive it as cost as ordered in C.M.P.No.1479/2010 within seven days from today, learned Magistrate shall treat it as the cost paid in C.M.P.No.1479/2010 and allow the said petition as has been done originally. First respondent is entitled to withdraw the amount. Issue a copy of the order to the petitioner. 9th December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv