Kerala High Court
Baladevan vs Seena Appukuttan on 13 October, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 21ST ASWINA, 1947
OP(CRL.) NO. 373 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.3183 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -II,THRISSUR
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:
BALADEVAN
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O RAMANUNNI, PATTALI HOUSE, PRANAVAM NAGAR, P.O.
OLLUKARA, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR, PIN - 680651
BY ADV SRI.T.S.SARATH
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED & STATE:
1 SEENA APPUKUTTAN
AGED ABOUT 45YEARS, W/O VELLYATH APPUKUTTAN, 105 B
WING, PAVITHRA HOUSING SOCIETY, DEEN DAYAL CROSS ROAD,
THAKKOOR VADY, DOMBIVALLY WEST, THANE DISTRICT.
MAHARASHTRA -, PIN - 421202
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED PUBLIC PROCECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
KOCHIN, PIN - 682031
SR PP SRI HRITHWIK C S
THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.10.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(CRL.) NO.373 OF 2023
2
2025:KER:75732
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,J.
---------------------
OP(CRL.) No.373 of 2023
---------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of October, 2025
JUDGMENT
This original petition (criminal) is filed with the following
prayers:-
"(i) To set aside the Exhibit P3 order dated 9.1.2023
in Crl.MP No 12627/2022 in CC No. 3183/2015 passed
by the JFCM II, Thrissur;
ii) Issue a direction directing the Judge, JFCM II,
Thrissur to issue summons to witnesses and direct
them to produce the documents as per the schedule
attached in Exhibit P2 ;
iii) Pass any such other orders as this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit in the interests of justice in the facts
and circumstances of the case."
(SIC).
2. When this original petition came up for consideration
on 03.07.2025, there was no representation for the petitioner.
Therefore, this Court passed the following order:
OP(CRL.) NO.373 OF 2023
2025:KER:75732
"No representation for the petitioner. The petitioner will
serve notice to the counsel appearing for the 1 st
respondent before the trial court and file a memo to
that effect before this Court within ten days. If no steps
are taken, the Registry will post this matter in the defect
list after ten days. "
3. Today also there is no representation for the
petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that this original
petition need not be retained here. The petitioner challenges
Ext.P3 order. Ext.P3 is an order passed by the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-II, Thrissur in an application filed to
receive the witness list and summon the witnesses. The same
is dismissed by the learned Magistrate as per impugned order.
It will be better to extract paragraph 5 of Ext.P3 order.
"5. From the above submissions and on perusal of the
materials, it is clear that the witness list is filed for
summoning the witnesses who are the managers of
various banks in Maharashtra, various districts of Kerala,
Thrissur etc... As per the allegations of the complainant
he had sent the money through various accounts. If he is
in possession of various documents to prove the transfer
of the money he could very well produce them. But
OP(CRL.) NO.373 OF 2023
2025:KER:75732
without producing the above documents, he is trying to
protract the proceedings by filing witness list after
witness list as well as petition to summon the above
witnesses which would cause much delay. It is very clear
that earlier witness list was filed and it was allowed by
this Court. Even though. processes were issued to the
above witnesses only one witness has been examined
before the Court in full and another witness was
examined in part. The witnesses were from different
parts of the country and it is filed even without the
proper address and communication details. The
complainant can seek another method of evidence to
prove his transaction, but without the same, he is filing
petitions after petitions and witness list after witness list.
I find force in the submissions of the respondent that the
application is filed with the malafide intention to protract
the proceedings. Considering the above, I am not
inclined to allow the application."
4. I see absolutely no reason to interfere with the
above finding of the fact by the learned Magistrate. The
calender case is registered in the year 2015. The Trial Court
will see that the calender case is disposed of as expeditiously
as possible. There, is no merit in this case. Therefore, this writ
petition is dismissed
OP(CRL.) NO.373 OF 2023
2025:KER:75732
The Registry will forward a copy of the judgment to the
Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
bng
Judgment reserved NA
Date of Judgment 13/10/25
Judgment dictated 13/10/25
Draft Judgment placed 14/10/25
Final Judgment uploaded 15/10/25
OP(CRL.) NO.373 OF 2023
2025:KER:75732
APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 373/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC NO
3183/2015 PENDING BEFORE THE JFMC II
THRISSUR DATED 27/5/2011
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED IN CRMP
NO 12627/2022 IN CC NO. 3183/2015 BEFORE
THE JFMC II THRISSUR DATED 30/12/2022
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL. M.P NO.
12627/2022 IN CC NO. 3183/2015 DATED
9.1.2023 PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II THRISSUR
