C A UNNIKRISHNAN Vs. C O CHACKO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Thepetitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The case has been at the stage of defence evidence. The petitioner has come to this Court claiming to be aggrieved by an order passed by the learned Magistrate on the application filed by him under Section 315 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate, it is submitted, did not entertain the said prayer for examination of the accused under Section 315 Cr.P.C. and is proceeding to dispose of the case itself.

(2.) Copy of the order has not been produced so far.Admittedly Ext.P2isthe applicationfiled. It isnotfiledby theaccusedunder Section 315 Cr.P.C. His counsel has signed the petition on his behalf. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter stands postedfor judgmentto this date. The petitioner has several grievances against the course adopted by the learned Magistrate. It is submitted that the defence witness, though summoned, has not been examined. The petitioner submits that he has beendeniedan opportunity to examinethe witnesses and post the case for judgment even without hearing thepetitioner's counsel.

(3.) Powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution and Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be invoked only in an exceptional case and sparingly in aid of justice. This law does not encourage challenge against interim orders passed. The policy of law is reflected clearly in Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. Normally such interlocutory orders must wait for their challenge along with the final order to be passed.Of course, there is jurisdictional competence for the court to invoke the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C. I am not persuaded to agree, on the facts and circumstancesof thiscase,thatany suchresort tothe exceptionalpowers available to this Court can or need be invoked.