IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3944 of 2009()
1. SURENDRAN, S/O. NARAYANAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN
Dated :21/12/2009
O R D E R
P.S.GOPINATHAN, J.
-------------------------------
Crl.R.P.No.3944 of 2009
--------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009
ORDER
The revision petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.771 of
2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I,
Pathanamthitta. He is facing prosecution for offences under
Sections 341, 323 and 294(b) and read with Section 34 I.P.C.
He filed a petition seeking an order of exemption from personal
appearance under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. The learned magistrate by order dated 8/6/2009
dismissed the petition. Now this revision petition.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the revision
petitioner and perusing the order impugned it appears that the
petition filed before the lower court was not with requisite
averments, to the effect that the revision petitioner would not
dispute his identity as the accused in that case and that there
would be a lawyer, who is authorised to give statements on his
behalf, representing him during the course of the trial and that
such statement given by the lawyer should not be disputed and
that he would not dispute the evidence taken in his absence etc.
In the above circumstance, I find that the learned magistrate
Crl.R.P.No.3944 of 2009
2
was correct in dismissing the petition. The revision petition is
devoid of merit. Accordingly it is dismissed with liberty to the
petitioner to apply afresh with requisite statements and
undertakings which shall be duly disposed by the magistrate
untrammeled by the observations in the order impugned. The
learned magistrate shall not insist his presence till such petition,
if any so filed is disposed.
P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE
skj