IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2007 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1928 WP(C).No. 6386 of 2007(I) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN CC 2097 2006 IN CC.2096/2006 of C.J.M.,KOTTAYAM CC.316/2005 of J.M.F.C., SASTHAMCOTTA (CC 317 2005) .................... PETITIONER: ------------ SAMUELKUTTY, CHIRAKKUMMEL KIZHAKKU PUTHEN VEEDU, KADAPPA MURI, MYNAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.KRISHNA RAJ RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. BABY JOSEPH, PROPRIETOR, JAWAN RUBBERS,KUREEKKAL VEEPATTU HOUSE, THAMARACHAL, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REP ITS SECRETARY. BY G.P. SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.C.No. 6386 of 2007 I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of February, 2007 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the complainant in two prosecutions, both under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The first respondent is the accused in both those prosecutions. 2. Those cases were transferred to the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kottayam as per the judgment in W.P.C. No. 4612 of 2006 by this Court. Later, an application was made by the petitioner to get that judgment reviewed, but the same was dismissed by this Court. The petitioner has come to this Court again with this writ petition. 3. What is the grievance? He prays that there may be a direction for expeditious disposal of the case. Secondly it is prayed that there may be a direction to exempt the petitioner from personal appearance. 4. The petitioner can certainly approach the learned Magistrate through counsel with a request to exempt him from personal appearance. I find no reason why the learned Magistrate should W.P.C.No. 6386 of 2007 2 insist on the personal presence of the complainant if such appearance is not necessary for the further progress of the case. If the personal presence is necessary on a particular date, the learned Magistrate must specify on the previous date that the personal presence is necessary. The complainant can make necessary application and appear through his counsel on other dates of posting. 5. Regarding the prayer for expeditious out of turn disposal, it is for the petitioner to apply before the learned Magistrate. Certain other cases have also been directed to be disposed of by the same Magistrate in the order of transfer and in these circumstances I do not want to issue any specific directions regarding expeditious disposal of the case. 6. This Crl.M.C. is hence dismissed, but with the specific observations made above regarding the petitioner's prayer to exempt from personal appearance on all dates of posting and also regarding the right of the petitioner to move for expeditious disposal. (R. BASANT) Judge tm W.P.C.No. 6386 of 2007 3