IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 30303 of 2008(G) -------------------------- CC.425/2006 of J.M.F.C., MANNARKAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------- K. UNNIMADHAVAN NAIR, S/O.M.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, 'LEELA MANDIRAM', ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. SYED MUHAMMED, S/O.KUNJUMON HAJEEYAR, MALAMAL, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. FATHIMA, W/O.SYED MUHAMMED, MALAMAL, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. THAYU, W/O.VEERAVU, MALAMAL, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, HE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 30303 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the complainant in a prosecution for the offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 506(1) and 447 IPC. Cognizance has already been taken. Respondents herein are the accused in that case. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a private complaint filed by the petitioner. Trial has not commenced yet. After the filing of the private complaint, the petitioner has secured an order from the Munsiff's Court, Alathur in a civil suit. A copy of the same is produced as Ext.P1. Petitioner intends to rely on this document in the trial which is to commence shortly. In fairness, the petitioner wanted to notify the accused of his intention to rely on this document. The petitioner therefore put in Ext.P2 memo before the learned Magistrate to inform the learned Magistrate that he wants to rely on the said order dated 31.05.08. Though the list along with the document was filed, the learned Magistrate has passed the following order; a non speaking one on such memo: “ Rejected and returned”. 2. Counsel contends that the procedure adopted by the W.P.(C). No. 30303 OF 2008 -:2:- learned Magistrate is totally incorrect. Complainant is expected to adduce all evidence in support of his case. Principles of natural justice as also the principles of fairness and reasonable opportunity for the accused demand that the accused must be notified of the evidence which the complainant wants to adduce in support of his case. It is only with the sublime motive of notifying the accused of the intention of the petitioner to rely on such document that the list along with a memo was filed. The learned Magistrate must have received the same and must have notified the accused persons of the filing of such list. An accused invariably has a right to know the nature of the evidence that will be adduced against him in the trial and it is only to ensure that this requirement is satisfied, that the memo was filed. It is improper on the part of the Magistrate to have rejected and returned the document, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. I find merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. I am unable to find any valid reason on the basis of which the learned Magistrate could have refused to receive the list, memo and document when it was produced by the W.P.(C). No. 30303 OF 2008 -:3:- petitioner/complainant. The learned Magistrate must have received the same, kept the same in the file and must have directed giving notice of the list, memo and the document to the counsel for the accused. That having not done, I am perfectly satisfied that the learned Magistrate has misdirected himself. The learned Magistrate has failed to appreciate and understand the purpose of which the petitioner has fairly produced the document sufficiently in advance before commencing the trial. 4. This W.P.(C) is, in these circumstances, allowed. A specific direction is issued to the learned Magistrate to receive the memo dated 03.10.08 along with the documents produced by the petitioner which shall be re-presented before the learned Magistrate by 22.10.08. Copy shall be furnished to the counsel for the accused by the petitioner. 5. Hand over copy of this judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioner. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb W.P.(C). No. 30303 OF 2008 -:4:- W.P.(C). No. 30303 OF 2008 -:5:- W.P.(C). No. 30303 OF 2008 -:6:-