High Court Kerala High Court

Rameem K. Ummer vs K.M.Ashraf on 20 March, 2007

Kerala High Court
Rameem K. Ummer vs K.M.Ashraf on 20 March, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Tr P(Crl) No. 39 of 2007()


1. RAMEEM K. UMMER, D/O. K.K.UMMER ALI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.M.ASHRAF, S/O. MARAKKAR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. K.A.MARAKKAR, (KAI MAKKAR),

3. AMINA, W/O. MARAKKAR K.A.,

4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.A.JALEEL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :20/03/2007

 O R D E R


                               R. BASANT, J.

               -------------------------------------------------

                        Tr.P.(Cri) NO. 39 OF 2007

               -------------------------------------------------

              Dated this the 20th day of March, 2007


                                    ORDER

The petitioner is the complainant in a prosecution, inter

alia, under Sec.498A of the IPC pending before the Judicial

Magistrate of the First Class-I, Aluva. Proceedings have been

initiated on the basis of the complaint filed by her before the

learned Magistrate. Cognizance has been taken. The

respondents/accused have already entered appearance

through counsel. The short prayer of the petitioner is that

the case may be transferred to any other court at the

neighbouring District Kottayam at Ettumanoor.

2. What is the ground? The short contention of the

petitioner is that she is being intimidated by the respondents/

accused. In these circumstances, a fair trial is not possible

at the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class -I,

Aluva, and it is prayed that there may be a transfer as prayed

for.

3. It is not necessary that the petitioner must appear on

Tr.P.(Cri) NO. 39 OF 2007 -: 2 :-

every date of posting before the learned Magistrate. The

petitioner’s personal appearance need be insisted only when the

evidence is to be recorded or for any other reason to be specified

by the learned Magistrate. I am satisfied that sufficient

circumstances are not brought out to justify the prayer for

transfer. The interests of justice shall be eminently served by

directing that the learned Magistrate must permit the petitioner

– a woman/complainant, to be represented by her counsel on all

dates of posting other than dates on which day her personal

presence is necessary for the progress of the trial. The learned

Magistrate shall issue specific directions showing the reason for

her personal presence if necessary. It shall be open to the

petitioner to complain to the police of any interference/threat to

her right to appear peacefully before the learned Magistrate and

take part of the proceedings.

4. With the above observations, this transfer petition is

dismissed.

5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for

the petitioner.

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/