IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1984 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CC.228/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, CHERTHALA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------- S. KUMAR, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.LATE P.SUBRAMONIAN, `LAKSHANA' PAIPPINMOODU, GOLF LINK ROAD, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.P.V.ANIL RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MR.CHANTHIROOR VIJAYAN, S/O.SHREEDHARA PANICKER, PARAMEL PADIKKAL KALARI, CHANTHIROOR P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ================== Crl.M.C. No. 1984 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 19th day of June, 2009. O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.228/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Cherthala. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order passed by the Magistrate on 12-5-2009 rejecting his application and issue of non-bailable warrant. 2. The argument of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that petitioner met with an accident and was advised to take rest for three months by the doctor and therefore he applied for exemption, which was not granted and therefore the order is to be quashed. 3. Annexure A6 proceeding paper of the court shows that the case was posted for the appearance of the petitioner on 10-11-2008 and since he was absent, summons was repeated and then he appeared through a Counsel and Crl.M.C.No.1984/2009 -2- filed an application for adjournment for his appearance on 30-12-2008. Again the case was adjourned twice for his appearance and finally it was posted to 12-5-2009. Again petitioner applied for adjournment. It was rejected and non-bailable warrant was issued. Petitioner did not produce any material to show for what reason he filed the application, which was rejected on 12-5-2009. 4. In such circumstances, I find no justification to quash the order as sought for by the petitioner. If the case of the petitioner is that it is not possible for him to physically move and therefore he cannot appear, he is at liberty to file an application under Section 205(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure and if such an application is filed the Magistrate may pass orders considering the grounds in accordance with law. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE dkr