R.Vasu v. State Of Kerala & 3 Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2015/6TH SRAVANA, 1937 CRL.A.No. 2298 of 2006 ( ) --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 66/2000 of J.M.F.C.-II, HARIPAD DATED 0305-2006 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN Crl.L.P. 512/2006 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 07-11-2006 APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT::
-------------------------- R. VASU, S/O.KUNJURAMAN, PROPRIETOR S.N. THEATRE, HARIPAD PATTAKULANGAR MADATHIL, THULAPPARAMPU, THEKKUM MURIYIL HARIPAD VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.R.REJI RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & ACCUSED::
--------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.
2. TAJ RELEASE, ERNAKULAM.
3. JAMAL, MANAGING PARTNER, TAJ RELEASE, AMAL COMPLEX, C.P. UMMER ROAD ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-35.
4. VINOD @ VIVEK, PARTNSER, TAJ RELEASE, DO. DO.
BY PP SMT SEENA RAMAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-072015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.D.RAJAN, J .........................................
Crl. A.No. 2298 of 2006 .......................................
Dated 28th July, 2015
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred against the judgment of acquittal in C.C.No.66 of 2000 of Judicial First Class Magistrate -II, Haripad which was filed under Section 138 of N.I.Act. After trial, the accused in the above case was acquitted by the trial court. Against that, appellant preferred this appeal obtaining special leave. After admission, this court directed the appellant to give notice to respondents 2 to 4. On 21.8.2012, notice was issued to respondents 2 to 4 through C.I of Police, Ernakulam North in which it is reported that the firm is not working in that place and the parties could not be traced out. After that information, this court directed the appellant to furnish the correct address of respondents 2 to 4 and to give notice to them. No attempt was made by the appellant so far and he is not interested in prosecuting the matter even after directions issued on 5.12.2012. In the circumstances, this appeal is dismissed for non prosecution. P.D.RAJAN, JUDGE lgk