HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:213 OF 2011 ORDER: The petitioner is facing trial in C.C.No.1 of 2002 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge-cum-Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 468, 471, 485, 486 r/w120-B of IPC. Even after service of notice, neither the petitioner appeared nor any representation was made on his behalf and therefore, the Court below issued NBWs on 6.1.2010. On coming to know about the issuance of NBWs, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.5 of 2010 under Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. seeking to recall the said warrants. However, the Court below dismissed the said application. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing the present revision. The main contention of Sri G.L. Nageswara Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is suffering from disease viz., Parkinsonism and he is totally bed ridden and therefore, he is not in a position to move. Further, according to him, the petitioner is residing at Rajahmundry whereas the trial is taking place at Machilipatnam in Krishna District. In those circumstances, according him, the Court below ought to have allowed the said application. From a perusal of the medical certificate, it appears that the petitioner is suffering from Parkinsonism for the past three years and he is now bedridden and therefore, he is not in a position to walk/travel or sign. The said certificate is dated 16.12.2010 and the same does not reveal the day or date or the period from which the petitioner is suffering. At the same time, it also does not disclose as to when the petitioner will recover from the said disease. Further the documents available on record disclose that the petitioner is going to the Doctor frequently for the purpose of treatment. If that being the case, there is no justification in stating that the petitioner cannot go to the Court for the purpose of appearance and recalling of warrants. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that the trial Court is justified in dismissing the said application. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to move an application under Section 70 (2) Cr.P.C before the Court below. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submission of the learned Counsel, this Court is of the view that one opportunity may be given to the petitioner to appear before the Court below and file an application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. Hence, the petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today. On such appearance and filing an application to recall the said warrants, the Court below by taking into consideration the disease of the petitioner, may recall the said warrants. It is further submitted that the petitioner is suffering from Parkinsonism and therefore, he cannot appear on every date of adjournment. In view of the said submission and the medical certificate, the petitioner is at liberty to avail the remedies that are left open to him under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. ______________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada Dated: 4.2.2011 Nn HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:213 OF 2011 4.2.2011