IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1854 of 2010() ------------------------------ CMP.2269/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOTTARAKKARA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/COMPLAINANT:- -------------------------------------------------------- ABDUL SALAM, S/O.ABDUL RAFAYANAN, MEVARATHU VEEDU,KARALIKKONAM, ARKKANNOOR P.O., ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & ACCUSED 1 TO 3 :- ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. C.S.HARI, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOTTARAKARA. 3. BALAKRISHNAN, POLICE CONSTABLE, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOTTARAKARA. 4. MADHU, POLICE CONSTABLE, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOTTARAKARA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.C.M.NAZAR FOR R1. THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt V.K.MOHANAN, J. ----------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.1854 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July 2010 O R D E R This revision petition is preferred challenging the order dated 7.12.2009 in C.M.P.No.2269/2009 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kottarakara by which the complaint preferred by the revision petitioner is dismissed as the complainant was absent and there was no representation. 2. Though this revision petition was filed on 8.3.2010, the matter being adjourned as there was no proper representation. This Court, on 24.10.10, 7.6.2010, 24.6.2010 and 5.7.2010 adjourned the case due to no representation. Today also there is no representation. The present revision petition also filed challenging an order, Crl.R.P.No.1854 of 2010 : 2 : dismissing the complaint for non-prosecution. Same is the position in this Court also. The above facts would show that the revision petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the revision petition and accordingly the same is dismissed for non prosecution. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE. Jvt