High Court Kerala High Court

M/S.Olam Exports (India) Ltd vs P.Govardhan on 11 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
M/S.Olam Exports (India) Ltd vs P.Govardhan on 11 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL A No. 47 of 2008()


1. M/S.OLAM EXPORTS (INDIA) LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. P.GOVARDHAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN

 Dated :11/01/2008

 O R D E R
                             K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J.

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

                               Crl.A.No.47 of 2008

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

                    Dated this the 11th day of January, 2008




                                     JUDGMENT

The complainant, in a complaint filed under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act, which was taken cognizance of

by the learned Magistrate and registered as C.C.No.649/1999 on

the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam, is

the appellant. He has come up in appeal being aggrieved by the

order of acquittal of the first respondent/accused in the case

under Section 256(1) Crl.P.C.

2. It is contended before me by the learned counsel for

the appellant that the complainant was present on several

occasions before the court below, that the first respondent/

accused had not appeared even once and non bailable warrant

was pending against him and in the circumstances, the acquittal

of the accused by the court below is not justified. The counsel

for the appellant has produced before me for perusal a

handwritten copy of the order sheet maintained by the court

below to show that the accused had not entered appearance.

Assuming that the handwritten copy produced is a true and

CRL.A.NO.47/2008 2

correct one, it shows that altogether from 13.1.1999, the date on

which the case was taken cognizance of by the Magistrate, till

5.1.2002, the date on which the accused was acquitted, there

were 15 postings and three years have also elapsed and the

appellant could not effect service of summons on the first

respondent, who is stated to have issued the cheque, which was

dishonoured. If the appellant was not vigilant even in having the

service completed within a period of three years, there is no

meaning in setting aside the order of the court below and

remitting the case of 1999 back to the court below after 9 years.

In the above view, I confirm the order of acquittal passed

by the court below and dismiss this Crl.Appeal.

K.P.BALACHANDRAN,

Judge

csl