High Court Kerala High Court

K.Valsan vs State Of Kerala on 27 February, 2007

Kerala High Court
K.Valsan vs State Of Kerala on 27 February, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 530 of 2007()


1. K.VALSAN, S/O. GOVINDAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :27/02/2007

 O R D E R
                                 R.BASANT, J

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

                           Crl.M.C.No.530 of 2007

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

               Dated this the 27th day of February  2007




                                   O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under

Sections 279 and 304 A I.P.C and Section 3(i) read with 181 of

the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner has come to this court

with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He claims to be

aggrieved by the order dated 18/12/2004. That order, in turn,

shows that a delay of about nine months for filing the

chargesheet, was condoned by the learned Magistrate, after

giving notice to the petitioner, who did not choose to enter

appearance and raise objections.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the matter stands listed for trial to 28/02/2007. No explanation

whatsoever is offered as to why the order dated 18/12/2004 was

not challenged till this date and the petitioner has come to this

court at the eleventh hour with this petition. Admittedly, the

matter stands listed for trial and the witnesses will be appearing

before the learned Magistrate on 28/02/2007. I am, in these

circumstances, satisfied that it is not necessary to invoke the

Crl.M.C.No.530/07 2

powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C and interrupt the progress of

the trial scheduled to commence on 28/02/2007.

3. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is

dismissed but I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be

at liberty to raise all his contentions before the learned

Magistrate including the contention that the condonation of

delay was not justified and the condonation of delay was without

notice to the petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr

Crl.M.C.No.530/07 3

Crl.M.C.No.530/07 4

R.BASANT, J

C.R.R.P.No.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF JULY 2006