Bharti Airtel Limited Formerly vs The Sub Divisional Magistrate on 23 May, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 963 of 2007()


1. BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED FORMERLY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE KERALA MANUSHYAVAKASA SAMITHI,

3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :23/05/2007

 O R D E R
                                     R. BASANT, J.

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

                            Crl.M.C.No.  963  of   2007

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

                       Dated this the 23rd day of   May, 2007


                                         O R D E R

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits and the report of the

learned S.D.M. reveals that order has been passed under Section 137(2)

Cr.P.C. dropping further proceedings in M.P.No. 22 of 2006 pending

before the first respondent. Request of the learned counsel for the

petitioner to that effect is accepted and this Crl.M.C. is dismissed as

unnecessary now.

(R. BASANT)

Judge

tm

R.BASANT, J.

————————————

Crl.M.C.NO.963 OF 2007

————————————

Dated this the 26th day of March, 2007.

2

ORDER

Against the petitioner, a conditional order under Section

133 Cr.P.C has been passed. The petitioner has entered

appearance. According to the petitioner, initiation of

proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C is not legally proper,

correct or justified in the light of a Division Bench decision of

this Court in Reliance Infocom Ltd. v. Chemancherry Grama

Panchayat [2006 (4) KLT 695]. The short grievance of the

petitioner that his objection that proceedings under Section 133

Cr.P.C is not maintainable is not being considered by the Sub

Divisional Magistrate.

2. Call for a report from the Sub Divisional Magistrate as

to why the objections raised by the petitioner is not being

considered. I make it clear that I expect the Sub Divisional

Magistrate to consider the said objection and pass appropriate

orders on merits expeditiously. The report of the Sub Divisional

Magistrate must reach this court by 30.04.2007.

3. Call on 30.04.2007.

H/O.                                                      (R.BASANT,JUDGE)

rtr/