IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.L.P..No. 351 of 2008() ------------------------------------- (AGAINST THE ORDER DTD. 27/11/2007 IN S.T.NO.1280/2007 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT II (MOBILE), KOTTAYAM) ....... PETITIONER: COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- P.V.GEORGE , PARIATHETTU HOUSE, PADINJATTUMCHERI MURI, KAVIYOOR, THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SMT.ELIZABETH MATHAI IDICULLA SRI.MOHAN IDICULLA ABRAHAM SRI.MARTIN D.ALUMKARA SMT.PUSHPY B.MURICKEN SMT.RACHEL JOSEPH RESPONDENTS:ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ 1. JOSE VARGHESE ,MALAYIL, VENNIKULAM, PURAMATTOM, MALLAPPALLY. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J ---------------------- Crl.L.P.No.351 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of September 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. His complaint was dismissed by the learned Magistrate invoking powers under Section 256 Cr.P.C. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the order. He seeks leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C to prefer an appeal. The plea of the accused was recorded at the Chief Judicial Magistrate' court and the case was transferred to the court of the learned J.F.C.M-II (Mobile), Kottayam. After it was transferred from the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the case underwent as many as ten adjournments. On the tenth day of adjournment, the learned Magistrate, taking note of the fact that the complainant was consistently absent, proceeded to pass the impugned order. Sequence of events from 04/06/2007 to 01/01/2008, the date of the impugned order, can be ascertained from the following entries in the ordersheet. 4/6/2007 - Received by transfer from C.J.M Court, Kottayam. Refiled as S.T.No.1280/2007 and posted to5.6.2007. 5/6/2007 - Posted for Evidence to 11/9/2007. 11/9/2007 - Posted for evidence to 23/11/2007. 23/11/2007 - Complainant absent. No representation also. Adjourned with a cost of Rs.150/- to the accused to 24/11/2007. 24/11/2007 - Cost paid. Complainant absent produce complainant for evidence to 28/11/2007. 28/11/2007 - Complainant absent today also produce complainant to 3/12/2007. 3/12/2007 - Complainant absent. Produce complainant for evidence to 17/12/2007. 17/12/2007 - Complainant absent today also. Produce complainant for evidence to 29/12/2007. 29/12/2007- Complainant absent today also. Several chances given. Adjourned as last chance produce complainant to 1/1/2008. 1/1/2008 - Complainant absent today also. Several chances given. Accused is acquitted under Section 256(i) Cr.P.C vide separate judgment. 2. I am of the opinion that the petitioner was certainly granted adequate and sufficient time by the learned Magistrate to support his allegations by adducing evidence. The petitioner has squandered his opportunity that was offered to him on a platter. He cannot be heard to complain that the impugned order is wrong and not justified. Frustrated by the want of co- operation on the part of the complainant to proceed further with the case, the learned Magistrate had, at last, resorted to the powers under Section 256 Cr.P.C to bring to termination the agony of this prolonged prosecution. I am not persuaded to agree that leave deserves to be granted. 3. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Leave refused. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr No representation for the petitioner.