Kuryan T.K v. Dr.Reghunathan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2015/11TH PHALGUNA, 1936 CRL.A.No. 747 of 2014 () ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN Crl.L.P. 158/2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 10.7.2014 AGAINST THE ORDER IN C.C.NO.296/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KATTAPPANA DATED 22.8.2012 APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

---------------------------------------------------------------------- KURIYAN T.K., AGED 52 S/O.KURUVILA, THURUMBUNKAL HOUSE, KALTHOTTI P.O. SWARAJ, IDUKKI DT., PIN 685507.

BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JEEVESH RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:

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

1. REGHUNATHAN, AGED 46 YEARS VETERINARY DOCTOR, OLIKKAL HOUSE, KATTAPPANA P.O. IDUKKI DT., PIN 685 508.

2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 031. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.V.S.SHIRAZ BAVA SRI.P.M.ZAFARULLAH R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. BINDU GOPINATH THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: shg/

K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.A. No.747 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The appellant was the complainant in C.C.No.296/2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattappana. On 22.8.2012 the learned Magistrate by the impugned order acquitted the first respondent/accused for the reason that the appellant was absent.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the first respondent.

3.

A perusal of the proceeding sheet of the trial court shows that the plea of the first respondent was recorded on 23.7.2011 and the case was adjourned for his evidence to 13.10.2011. From 13.10.2011 to 22.8.2012 the date on which the impugned order was passed there were seven postings. The appellant did not appear even on a single posting date. The learned counsel submits that the appellant was under treatment for chronic rheumatic arthritis. He relies on a certificate issued by a doctor about

Crl.A. No.747 of 2014 -2one year after the disposal of the matter. This cannot be taken into consideration. The proceedings became a punishment for the first respondent. I do not find any merit in this appeal.

In the result, this appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE //True copy// P.A. TO JUDGE shg/