Reena Denson vs James Joseph

WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/27TH PHALGUNA, 1936

Crl.MC.No. 35 of 2015 () ------------------------- M.P.NO.576/2014 IN ST. NO.341/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - III, ALUVA --------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------

REENA DENSON, AGED 45 YEARS, D/O.CHACKO, BATHLAHAM, MALABAR CANCER CENTRE, MOOZHIKKARA, P.O.KODIYERI, THALASSERY-670103.

BY ADVS.SRI.B.KRISHNAN SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY SRI.RAJESH V.NAIR

RESPONDENTS : ----------------------

1. JAMES JOSEPH, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, THOTTASKATH HOUSE, NEAR SEMINARIPPADY, ALUVA WEST VILLAGE, ALUVA-682101.

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, COCHIN-31.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:'

bp Crl.MC.No. 35 of 2015 ()

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF M.P.NO.576/2014 FILED BEFORE THE FIRST CLASS JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ALUVA.

ANNEXURE A2: COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT ALUVA IN MP NO. 576/2014 IN ST 341/2012 DT 22/11/2014.

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

bp

P. UBAID, J. --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.35 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of March, 2015

O R D E R

The petitioner herein is the accused in S.T.No.341/2012 of

the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Aluva. It is a

prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Pending trial the petitioner made an application before the

learned Magistrate as M.P.No.576/2014 to return the complaint to

the complainant for presentation before the Judicial First Class

Magistrate, Thalassery on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, in

view of the legal position recently settled by the Honourable

Supreme Court. The learned Magistrate dismissed the said

application on the ground that the trial has already crossed the

stage under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The said order is under challenge. On a perusal of the impugned

order and the Crl.M.C. itself, I find that this proceeding is really

meritless, and does not deserve any consideration. Even the

petitioner's Crl.M.C. shows that his counsel had already cross

examined the complainant, when he made application to return Crl.M.C. No.35/2015 2

the complaint. Nothing more is required to find that he made

such an application after the proceeding crossed the stage under

Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears that

this is an experimental proceeding. I find that the petitioners'

request to return the complaint was rightly and legally rejected by

the learned Magistrate. The said order does not require any

interference by this Court.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed in limine, without

being admitted to files.

Sd/-

P. UBAID, JUDGE

sd