IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1174 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.941/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I,OTTAPPALAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M.K.ASAF ALI, RETIRED JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, HAFSA MAHAL, ENKAKAD, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.BHASKARAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS --------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OTTAPALAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C..No.1174 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11 th day of June, 2010 ORDER In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner who is a prosecution witness (CW12) in C.C.No.941/2009 on the file of the J.F.C.M, Ottappalam for offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304A IPC, seeks a direction to the Magistrate to exempt the petitioner from the list of witnesses on the ground that he is suffering from a grave illness “Adeno Carcinoma” and after undergoing a major surgery at Leelavathy Hospital, Mumbai he is unable to travel a long distance and undergo the stress and strain. The petitioner retired from service on 28.2.2002 as a Joint R.T.O. 2. This Court called for a report from the J.F.C.M, Ottapalam. The learned Magistrate as per letter dated 9.6.2010 has stated that on 22.3.2010 the witnesses including the petitioner herein cited for the day were present and since the court was engaged in other matters all the witnesses were bound over to 3.6.2010. The evidence for the prosecution is still not Crl. M.C. No.1174 of 2010 2 over and that no warrant has been issued to the petitioner. 3. It appears that the learned Magistrate is indulging in staggered recording of evidence and the consequence is that the petitioner is put to untold harship. The fact that no warrant has been issued against the petitioner is not a solace. Accordingly having regard to the morbid condition of the petitioner, his examination in the case is dispensed with and the M.V.I. certificate issued by the petitioner shall be proved through any other witness, who is able to identify the petitioner's signature or handwriting. The Asst.Public Prosecutor in charge of the case could have used his discretion and exempted the petitioner from examination. This Crl.M.C is disposed of as above. Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj