Kerala High Court
Sunilkumar vs Vaisakh on 8 January, 2026
2026:KER:1162
CRL.A NO. 2343 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 18TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.A NO. 2343 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.12.2025 IN Crl.L.P. NO.484
OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA ARISING OUT OF THE
ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 08.10.2025 IN CC NO.1036 OF 2015 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, ATTINGAL
APPELLANT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
SUNILKUMAR
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O. BHASKARAN, BHASKARA BHAVAN, MUDAPURAM,
KIZHUVILAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
VIJAYADASAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. GOPALAN,
PUTHUVALVILA VEEDU, MUDAPURAM P.O., KIZHUVILAM
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695104
BY ADV SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED & STATE:
1 VAISAKH
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. VIJAYAN, THEJOVATHI VEEDU, IRATTAKALUNG,
KUNTHALLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN
- 695304
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
PP ADV.ANIMA
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:1162
CRL.A NO. 2343 OF 2025
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 08th day of January, 2026 The complainant in C.C.No.1036/2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Atingal has filed this appeal, with the leave of this Court, challenging the order dated 08.10.2025, reproduced hereunder.
1. This is a private complaint filed by the complainant U/Ss. 138 & 142 of NI Act and 109(1)
(a) of CrPC.
2. Several chances already granted for appearance of complianant for adducing evidence. Despite that complainant continuously absent and did not adduce evidence. This court is satisfied that the complainant is not desirous of prosecuting the case and the case cannot be proceeded without the appearance of the complainant. Hence complaint is dismissed for want of prosecution.
2. Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Though consolidated notice was issued to the respondent/accused in C.C.No.1036/2015, in the delay petition and in this appeal, he did not turn up, despite service of notice upon him. On perusal of the order impugned, complaint was dismissed under Section 256 Cr.P.C, i.e., the same is nothing but an acquittal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant 2026:KER:1162 CRL.A NO. 2343 OF 2025 3 sought for an opportunity for the complainant to adduce evidence for setting aside the order and restoring the complaint back to the file.
4. In fact, the accused was acquitted and the complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. Hence, in the interest of justice, an opportunity is to be provided to the complainant to proceed with the matter by adducing evidence.
5. In view of the above, the order impugned is set aside. Consequently C.C.No.1036/2015 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Atingal is restored back to file, with direction to the learned Magistrate to proceed further after providing an opportunity of the appellant herein to adduce evidence. For that purpose, the appellant is directed to appear before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Atingal positively at 11.00 a.m, on 30.01.2026.
Accordingly, this criminal appeal stands allowed.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE rkr