IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2011 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 388 of 2005() ------------------------------------- M.P.NO.6120/2004 OF JUDICAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHAVAKKAD .... (CRIME NO.168/2004 OF GURUVAYUR POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- HEMANTH RAO BURADA, S/O.VENKATAPPADY BURADA, SARADHA NILAYAM, SALIPETA, VIJAYANAGARAM, ANDHRAPRADESH. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.CHACKO, SMT.C.M.CHARISMA, SMT.SONIYA.M, SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.SIRAJUDDIN, S/O.YOUSUFF, AGED 25 YEARS, KUNNIKALATHU HOUSE, KUTTIKKADU, PONNANI. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.388 of 2005 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of May, 2011. ORDER This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed on 25.01.2005 seeking a direction to the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chavakkad to dispose of Annexures-A1 and A2, petitions filed by the petitioner and respondent No.2 for interim custody of diamonds jointly to secure the ends of justice. 2. Petitioner filed C.M.P.No.4028 of 2004 for interim custody of the diamonds involved in the case. The second respondent filed a similar petition – Annexure-A2. It is alleged that learned Magistrate posted Annexure-A2, petition for orders on 31.01.2005. In this circumstance this Criminal Miscellaneous Case. 3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case was filed on 25.01.2005 and came up for hearing on 27.01.2005. On that day it was directed that the case be taken up when moved again. Thereafter this case is coming up for hearing for the first time. 4. Petitioner and counsel remain absent. If Annexures-A1 and A2 are not disposed of so far, it is open to the petitioner to request learned Magistrate to dispose of those petitions jointly. If both or any of the petitions are disposed of and petitioner is aggrieved, it is open to him to challenge the same (if it is not already done) as provided under law. Crl.MC No.388/2005 2 With the above observation this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks