IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929 CRL.A.No. 2485 of 2007 -------------------------------------- ST.3081/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT: AADAM BAZAR KURIES (PVT) LTD., AADAM BAZAR BUILDING, RICE BAZAR, THRISSUR TOWN REP. BY ITS LITIGATION CLERK NARAYANAN KUTTY, AGED 40, S/O. BHASKARAN, RAYIRATHU HOUSE, P.O. PUTHUR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED: 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. PRAKASH BABU, AGED 38 YEARS, PUZHUMUKAL HOUSE, MAROTICHAL P.O., MAROTICHAL DESOM, THRISSUR DIST. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.P. Balachandran, J. --------------------------- Crl.A.No. 2485 of 2007 --------------------------- JUDGMENT Heard the counsel for the appellant. The appeal is filed against the acquittal of the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C., in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The impugned order shows that on 30.8.2007, the complainant was specifically directed to be present on 1.9.2007, as a last chance. Despite the said direction, the complainant was absent and petition was filed. All the same, the accused was present. The learned Magistrate has observed that the proceedings sheet in the case showed that the complainant is continuously absent. When the complainant is continuously absent, disabling the court from making any progress in the case, which was filed as early as in 2006, there is nothing wrong in the learned Magistrate having acquitted the accused. CRA 2485/07 2 This appeal, in the circumstances, is devoid of merit and is dismissed. 3rd January, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv