Dinoop M.P v. Abdul Khader A.V

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/28TH SRAVANA, 1936 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1356 of 2014 () -------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 4706/2012 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KANNUR REVISION PETITIONER(S)/COMPLAINANT:

----------------------------------------------------------- DINOOP M.P, AGED 40 YEARS SNEHADEEPAM, ANCHAMPEEDIKA P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.P.S.BINU RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED:

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

1. ABDUL KHADER A.V, AGED 47 YEARS S/O MUHAMMED, ARAMULLAN VALIYAMANATHUMMAL, VRINDAVANAM ANCHAMPEEDIKA P.O, MOTTAMMAL VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT 670001

2. THE STATE OF KERALA, RERPESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GITHESH R.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sab

P.UBAID, J.

----------------------------- Crl. R.P No. 1356 OF 2014 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of August, 2014.

O R D E R

The revision petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of his complaint as barred by limitation, by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I, Kannur. His complaint was received as C.M.P No. 4706/2012. Along with the complaint, he also filed C.M.P No. 4707/2012 for condonation of delay. On 11.10.2013, the trial court dismissed C.M.P 4707/2012, and consequently the complaint was also rejected. Aggrieved by the rejection of complaint he has come up in revision.

This revision was called in open court twice. I find no body to make representation for the revision petitioner. It appears that the revision petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the revision. Hence the revision petition is dismissed for non prosecution. P. UBAID, JUDGE sab