IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3819 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRRP.47/2009 of VI ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CC.124/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KOCHI .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------------------------------- P.J. JOSEPH, S/O. JOSEPH, PALAKKARAN VEEDU, GODOWN ROAD, EDAPPALY TOLL BHAGAM, EDAPPALLY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU MR.M.REVIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. JAMES, S/O. JOSE, RICHMAN KURIES, POST OFFICE LINK ROAD, BROADWAY, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 3819 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 26th day of November,2009 ORDER Petitioner is the de facto complainant in C.C.124/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kochi. Petitioner filed M.P.423/2009 under section 302 of Code of Criminal Procedure for engaging a counsel of his choice to conduct the prosecution. Learned Magistrate as per Annexure A order dated 20.3.2009 dismissed the petition. Petitioner challenged the order before Sessions Court, Ernakulam in Crl.R.P.47/2009. Learned Sessions Judge by Annexure B order dismissed the petition. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, as no second revision is available, to quash Annexure B order and granting permission to engage a counsel or in the alternate to engage a counsel to assist the prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Petitioner has no allegation as against the Assistant Public Prosecutor either that he is biased or Crl.M.C.3819/2009 2 incompetent or prejudiced. The only grievance is that the case was pending for about six years and there was no permanent Assistant Public Prosecutor to conduct the case. Annexure B order shows that a permanent Assistant Public Prosecutor was subsequently appointed. In such circumstance, on that ground there is no necessity to grant permission to engage a counsel. Learned counsel then submitted that in any case petitioner may be permitted to engage a counsel so that the said counsel could assist the Public Prosecutor. Petition is disposed permitting the petitioner to engage a counsel to assist the Assistant Public Prosecutor in conducting the case making it clear that prosecution is to be conducted only by the Assistant Public Prosecutor. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006