Salin C.Narayanan vs State Of Kerala on 19 March, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 964 of 2009()


1. SALIN C.NARAYANAN, CHORIYAM MAKKAL VEEDU
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :19/03/2009

 O R D E R
                      V. RAMKUMAR, J.
                   = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                      Crl.R.P.No.964 of 2009
                   = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
             Dated this the 19th day of March, 2009

                              ORDER

Petitioner, who is the 1st accused in C.C.No.312/2007 on

the file of the J.F.C.M-II, Kanjirappally for offences punishable

under Sections 143,120B,465,468,471 and 420 read with 149

IPC challenges the order dated 28.11.2008 passed by the

learned Magistrate dismissing the application filed by the

petitioner for discharge.

2. The petitioner and the other accused persons were

permitted by this Court as per Annexure III order dated 18.8.08

in Crl.M.C.No.3124/2008 to plead for a discharge in absentia.

The impugned order has been passed pursuant to the said

permission. The learned Magistrate has found a prima facie case

for framing of charge against the accused persons after holding

that there is no sufficient ground to arrive at a conclusion that

the charge against the accused persons are groundless.

3. I am not entering into the merits of the case, since that

may produce one party or other during the trial of the case.

Crl.R.P.No.964 of 2008
2

Suffice it to say that the court below having found a prima facie

case for framing charge, the remedy of the petitioner is to face

the trial. The accused may apply to the Magistrate for personal

exemption and in case the learned Magistrate is satisfied about

the claim for personal exemption, I am sure that the learned

Magistrate will not insist on their personal appearance before

the court below unless a question of identity arises for

consideration.

4. The petitioner and the other accused may apply for

personal exemption, not withstanding the warrants, if any,

pending against them.

This Crl.R.P is disposed of as above.

Dated this the 19th day of March, 2009.

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

sj