IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 CRL.A.No. 1020 of 2010() ------------------------ ST.193/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHITTUR .................... APPELLANT: COMPLAINANT ------------------------- GOVINDASWAMI, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. RANGASWAMY, 3/79, DEVANGAPURAM, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED AND STATE -------------------------------- 1. KITTUNNI, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. KUNJU, PERUMATTI, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY P.P. SMT. PUSHPALATHA M.K. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.A. No. 1020 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 4th Day of June, 2010 ORDER The complainant in a prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is the appellant as he is aggrieved by the order of acquittal recorded by the trial court under section 256(1) Cr.P.C. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that when the case was called at the time of roll call, the complainant and his counsel were present and the case was passed over for recording evidence, and usually, the passed over matters being taken after 3 p.m on every day. But the case was taken before that time and thus, neither the complainant nor his counsel was present. Therefore, the counsel for the appellant submitted one more opportunity may be granted to the complainant to prosecute the complaint. 3. From the averments contained in the appeal memorandum, it appears that the cheque in question CRL.A.1020/10 -:2:- covers and amount of Rs.65,000/-. The complaint was filed during October, 2008. Thereafter the complainant had filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination in the month of October 2009. 4. Considering the fact that the cheque in question covers an amount of Rs.65,000/- and the court below has already taken cognizance upon the complaint, and evidence has already been started, I am of the view that one more opportunity can be given to the complainant to prosecute the matter, but subject to terms. In the result, this appeal is disposed of setting aside the order dated 30.3.2010 in STC No.193/2009 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur on condition that he shall deposit a sum of Rs.2000/- in the court below. Accordingly, the appellant complainant is directed to appear before the court below on 5.7.2010 on which date, the learned Magistrate is directed to restore the complaint on file on his satisfaction that the complainant deposits a sum of Rs.2000/- as directed above and to proceed with CRL.A.1020/10 -:3:- the case in accordance with the procedure and law and to dispose of the same on merit. On depositing Rs.2000/- as directed above, a sum of Rs.1000/- shall be paid to the accused on his appearance and the balance amount of Rs.1000/- shall be deposited into the State Exchequer. With the above direction, this Crl. Appeal is disposed of. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- CRL.A.1020/10 -:4:- O.P.No. JUDGMENT Dated:..