Zeenath Assan Ali And Others vs The Secretary on 24 July, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22348 of 2008(I)



1. ZEENATH ASSAN ALI AND OTHERS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. THE SECRETARY, KADUNGALLOORE GRAMA PANCH
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.R.SREEJITH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :24/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   W.P.C.No. 22348 of 2008 I
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 24th day of July, 2008

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioners want to assail an order passed under

Section 138 Cr.P.C. by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kochi.

According to the petitioners, they are aggrieved by the said order.

Only the first petitioner was a party to that proceedings. The first

petitioner has admittedly been served with a copy of the order .

Why have the petitioners come before this Court with this

petition under Article 226 of the Constitution without and before

approaching the revisional court to challenge Ext.P5 order in

accordance with law? No satisfactory explanations are offered.

2. It is submitted that the other petitioners being not

parties to the proceedings, have not been served with the copy of

the order under Section 138 Cr.P.C. Had they applied for a

copy? It is admitted that they have not applied for. Admittedly

the first petitioner has been served with the order. If they can

W.P.C.No. 22348 of 2008
2

come together before this Court, why are they not making use of the

order issued to the first petitioner. For this also no satisfactory

explanation is offered. The counsel submits that there may atleast be a

direction that until the petitioners approach the court of revision and

obtain orders, the impugned order may not be executed.

3. I am unable to agree. Having come to the wrong forum

without any valid explanation, the petitioners cannot request the said

forum to keep the order in abeyance until they go to the right forum

and initiate proceedings. The petitioners must immediately rush to the

revisional court and challenge the order. I am not satisfied that the

jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution can or ought to be

invoked in favour of the petitioners.

This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.

(R. BASANT)
Judge

tm