IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2009 / 9TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2159 of 2009() ------------------------------ CC.1206/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------- ROHINIMANI,ASWATHY (DWARAKA),KOTTARKAVU, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT/ACCUSED: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP:BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. DILEEP KUMAR,PARVATHY BHAVAN, MARAKKUNNAM,NEYYAVADAVU,KADAPPAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR : SRI C S HRITHWIK THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.2159 of 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this 31st day of July 2009 ORDER Since the order under challenge is one dismissing the complaint under section 204(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”) notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. I heard counsel for petitioner and public prosecutor who took notice for respondent No.1. 2. Petitioner filed complaint against respondent No.2 on 07-07-2004 for offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned counsel submits that since then, petitioner was taking every step to procure the presence of respondent No.2. In the meantime steps under section 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were also ordered but it could not be executed. Learned counsel submits that on 28-02-2007 there was a request on behalf of petitioner to give sufficient time to take necessary steps but that request was not allowed. It is seen from the order that on 28-02-2007 petitioner was present in court. I find no reason to think that petitioner willfully did not take steps in the matter. Hence I am inclined to give an opportunity to the petitioner prosecute the complaint. Resultantly this revision is allowed and the order under challenge is set aside. The case is remitted to the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mavelikkara for fresh disposal after giving petitioner Crl.R.P.No.2159 of 2009 2 an opportunity to take necessary steps. Petitioner shall appear on that court on 28-08-2009. THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE Sbna/