IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2695 of 2009 --------------------------------------- CC.249/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, PERAMBRA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: USSAIN, S/O.KUTTIALI, THEKKEYIL HOUSE, IYYAD P.O., UNNIKULAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. M/S.KALPETTA JANAKSHEMA MARUTHI CHITS (P) LTD., NEAR CHIRAKKAL KAVU TEMPLE, BALUSSERY, REPRESENTED BY MR.MADUSOODANAN. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR FOR R1 ADV.SRI.B.N.SHIVSANKAR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2695 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused and second respondent the complainant in C.C.No.249/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Perambra. Petitioner was originally convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. He challenged the conviction and sentence before Sessions Court, Kozhikode in Crl.A.No.186/2008. By Annexure-I judgment, learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the conviction and sentence and remanded the case to the Magistrate granting an opportunity to the petitioner to get the handwriting in the dishonoured cheque compared with his admitted signature by an expert. Judgment specifically provides that prayer to send the cheque to an expert is to be considered if petitioner takes necessary steps within a period of thirty days from the date of his appearance. Petitioner was directed to appear before the Magistrate on 16.3.2009. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to extend the period fixed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Annexure-I CRMC 2695/09 2 judgment and to direct Judicial First Class Magistrate- II, Perambra to consider the application, though not filed, within a time frame. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and second respondent were heard. 3. By Annexure-I judgment, learned Additional Sessions Judge had given an opportunity to the petitioner to get the signature in the dishonoured cheque compared by an expert. But, it was provided that steps is to be taken within one month from the date of his appearance. Petitioner is expected to take steps within that period. But, he did not do. Petitioner is not entitled to approach this Court to extend the period fixed by learned Additional Sessions Judge. If petitioner was laid up, as stated by the petitioner, it is up to him to establish before the learned Magistrate that because of unforeseen reasons, he could not take steps and file an application. If it is so satisfied, learned Magistrate may pass appropriate order in the application filed. Petition is disposed. 20th October, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv