IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4132 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1349/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KARUNAGAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED:- ------------------------ K.P. GOPINATHAN PILLAI, KALPAKAM, PADA, SOUTH, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, VIJAYAN PILLAI K.P. KOKKARIKKAL, PUTHENVEEDU, VADAKKUMTHALA MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLI BY ADV. SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINT & STATE:- ---------------------------------- 1. B.USHA, W/O. ANIL, VADAKKUMTHALA EAST POST, KARUNAGAPPALLI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4132 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The signature in the cheque is denied and disputed. A civil case has also been filed in respect of the same liability. In the civil case, the petitioner had wanted the cheque to be forwarded to the expert for comparison. That petition now has been allowed, it is submitted. The petitioner filed an application before the learned Magistrate to adjourn the trial of the criminal case until the civil case is disposed of or at least till the report of the expert is secured. That prayer was rejected by the impugned order. In fact when the impugned order was passed, the application before the civil court to send the cheque to the expert was only pending. It is subsequently that the same has been allowed and the cheque directed to be forwarded to the expert, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Be that as it may, the petitioner has come to this Court on 31.10.08 to air an apprehension that the trial in the Crl.M.C. No.4132 of 2008 2 criminal case may commence on 01.11.2008. It is now submitted that the trial has already commenced. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied if the petitioner is now given an opportunity at the defence stage to insist that the petitioner must be enable to secure the report of the expert and introduce the same as defence evidence in the case. I am of opinion that the petitioner must make that request before the learned Magistrate and considering the totality of circumstances the learned Magistrate at the defence stage will have to consider that request afresh. 4. With the above observations, this Crl.M.C is dismissed. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner for production before the learned Magistrate. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-