IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2011 / 1ST ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3220 of 2011 -------------------------------- CC.634/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -I, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2: 1. SUMESH ZAVIER, S/O.ZAVIER, VELIYIL, WARD NO.19, MARARIKULAM THEKKU PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. ZAVIER @ PONNAPPAN, VELIYIL, WARD NO.19, MARARIKULAM THEKKU PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAISURYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN CRMC 3220/2011 ANNXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF CMP 2178/11 FILED BY THE EPTITIONER BEFORE JFCM-I ALAPPUZHA ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT. 15.6.11 PASSED BY THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE IN CMO 2178/11 ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION UNDER SECTION 311 OF CRPC FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE ON 24.11.11. /TRUE COPY/ N.K.Balakrishnan, J. ------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3220 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2011 ORDER Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.634/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Alappuzha. They appeared in court. They were represented by the counsel engaged by them. PWs 1 to 10 were examined by the prosecution. It is submitted that those witnesses were not cross- examined by the learned counsel for the accused. The contention raised by the petitioners is that they came to know of the fact that those witnesses were not cross-examined only at a later stage. That plea cannot be accepted. However, it is just and proper that the witnesses are allowed to be cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused. It is seen that the request to recall PWs 8 to 10 was allowed by the learned Magistrate. But, since the defacto complainant and and other witnesses were not cross-examined by the learned counsel for the accused, it is stated that no purpose will be served by recalling PWs 8 to 10 only. Now the request is to recall PWs 1 to 7 also. It is important CRMC 3220/2011 2 to note that if the witnesses are to be summoned again, they cannot go for work on that day. Each of them will be losing at least `.350/- per day on that count alone. Besides, they have to spend money for their expenses to attend the court on that day. 2. Considering the entire circumstances, I find that PWs 1 to 7 shall also be allowed to be recalled on condition that petitioners should deposit in court the bata at the rate of `.500/- per day per head. The amount so deposited shall be released to the witnesses immediately after their examination. Learned Magistrate shall fix either one day or two days for their examination. Petition is disposed of as stated above. (N.K.Balakrishnan, Judge) tkv