IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 333 of 2009() ------------------------ CC.1003/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AMABALAPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SATHEESAN, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, MULLAPALLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, AASNAPRAMBIL NORTH.PO.,THALAVADY VILLAGE ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.S.SANAL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): STATE, DE-COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. BEENA JAMES, NALPATHAYIL HOUSE, AANAPRAMBAL NORTH P.O.,THALAVADY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009 ALONG WITH CRMC NO. 342 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NOs. 333 and 342 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th day of February, 2009. O R D E R These petitions are filed with a prayer to quash all further proceedings in C.C.1003/07 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ambalappuzha as well as C.C.1016/07 pending before the very same Court. The grievance of the petitioner is protraction of the case and therefore this Court called for a report from the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ambalappuzha and a perusal of the report would reveal that the defacto complainant had been submitting complaints after complaints requesting for change of Assistant Public Prosecutors and at the same time does not appear before Court to give evidence in support of her case. A very detailed report is submitted by the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate in her concluding paragraph has stated that there is no negligence on her part but it is due to the non-appearance and non co-operation of the defacto complainant in these cases. She also had CRL.M.C. NOs.333 & 342/09 -:2:- submitted that both these cases shall be disposed of as early as possible. 2. As far as the case is concerned still there is non- bailable warrant pending against the defacto complainant. It is for the prosecution also to help the Court to procure the presence of the witnesses and it is to be stated that if sufficient opportunities are given and still one is not able to procure the presence of the witnesses then the Court has to resort to some method whereby the litigation can be proceeded with. So giving that power to the Magistrate making it very clear that earnest attempt be made to procure the presence of the witnesses and if it go beyond reach to take appropriate legal decisions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The CRL.M.Cs. are disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-