IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4366 of 2010() ------------------------------------ LPR NO.79/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KODUNGALLUR ..................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- THULASIDAS, S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY, NEDIYIRIPPIL HOUSE, P.O. KAZHIMBRAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, INDIA, NOW RESIDING AT POST BOX NO.1184, RIYADH, KIGNDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH, SMT.VAHEEDA BABU, SRI.K.A. NOUSHAD, SRI.P.G. PRAMOD, SRI.RAHUL KANDAMPULLY. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. M/S. INDRAPRESTHA HIRE PURCHASE & INVESTMENTS, TRIPRAYAR, P.O. NATTIKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND LITIGATION CLERK DEVANANDAN, S/O.NARAYANA PANICKER, KUMKUMATH HOUSE, VALAPPAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4366 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 1st day of November,2010 ORDER Petitioner the accused, in C.C.1003/2009 now pending as L.P.79/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur, filed this petition challenging Annexure III order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing his application filed under section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel is that the offence alleged against the petitioner is only under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and as held by this court presence of the petitioner is to be dispensed with during trial and the learned Magistrate is Crl.M.C.4366/2010 2 not justified in dismissing the application on the ground that case is included in the long pending register. 4. Annexure II is the application filed under section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Magistrate. That application was filed not by the party, but for the accused by the counsel. When presence of the petitioner is to be dispensed with during trial, it is for him to apply stating that if permission is granted, on his behalf his counsel will appear and evidence could be recorded in his absence treating presence of the counsel as his presence, undertaking that he will not challenge the evidence so recorded either before that court or in appeal or revision and he will not dispute the identity. As the application is not filed by the party, I do not find any reason to interfere with Annexure III order. Annexure III will not stand in the way of the petitioner to file a proper application before the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. Crl.M.C.4366/2010 3 Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006