IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2007 / 12TH POUSHA 1928 Crl.MC.No. 3390 of 2006() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC 323/2002. IN CC.412/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ALATHUR .................... PETITIONER/ COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------- JANAKI, W/O.A.RAMAN, RAMESH NIVAS, NEAR BUS STAND, AYILOOR, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM SMT.K.USHA RESPONDENTS/ ACCUSED: ---------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NENMARA. 2. ARUMUKHAN, S/O.PAZHANIMALA, PULACKALPARAMBIL VEEDU, AYILOOR VILLAGE, AYILOOR, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. MOHANAN, S/O.MANI, PULACKALPARAMBIL, AYILOOR VILLAGE, DO. 4. CHELLAN, S/O.KUPPELAN, PALACOLONY VEETTIL, AYILOOR. 5. SANJAYAN, S/O.CHAMAYI, LAVANNYA NIVAS, AYILOOR. 6. UDHAYAN, S/O.CHAMAYI, DO. 7. MURUKAN, S/O.KASU, PADINJARETHARA VEETTIL, AYILOOR. 8. VINU, S/O.KASU, DO. 9. UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.KARUMAN, DO. 10. KRISHNANKUTTY, S/O.CHELLAPPAN, PADINJARETHARA VEETTIL, AYILOOR. 11. UNNIDEVAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, DO. 12. MANIKANDAN, S/O.CHAMI, DO. 13. FIROZ @ BIJOY, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, DO. 14. VINU, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY, DO. 15. SHIBU, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, CHITTILASSERY KASABAMOCKIL, CHITTILASERY AMSOM, ALATHUR. 16. SUDHAKARAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, PUTHUSSERY AMSOM, PALAKKAD. 17. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR GIKKU JACOB ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SRI.S.KRISHNA PRASAD (AYALUR) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.3390 of 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2007 ORDER The grievance of the petitioner/complainant is that C.C.No.323 of 2002 and C.C.No.412 of 2005 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alathur are not being taken up for disposal together. There is reason to direct joint trial/consolidation of the charges, it is submitted. Report of the learned Magistrate was called for. The learned Magistrate reports that no such application has been filed by anyone for joint trial/consolidation of charges. 2. Faced with that situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner only prays that the petitioner may be permitted to file a proper application seeking the said relief before the learned Magistrate. I am satisfied that the said request can be allowed. 3. In the result, this Crl.M.C is, dismissed, but with the observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek appropriate relief from the learned Magistrate, who shall pass appropriate orders on merits after considering the rival contentions. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- 2