P.N. RAMAN Vs. K. ABDUL RAHIMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners challenge the orders passed by the trial court in dismissing the application for condonation of delay in filing the complaints and the consequent orders passed by the trial court dismissing the complaints. The matters arise out of complaints filed by the petitioners against the 1st respondent alleging offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The 1st respondent accused is the same person in both these matters and the complainants are different persons. The facts in both these matters are almost identical in so far as the issue posed for determination before this Court.

(2.) The dishonoured cheques in these cases were drawn on State Bank of Travancore, Kolagappara Branch, and the cheques were sent for collection through the bank, wherein the complainants have maintained account, which is also the same bank. Initially, the petitioners had filed the respective complaints before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kalpetta, on 23.8.2014. Later, by virtue of the directives of the Apex Court contained in the judgment dated 1.8.2014 in Dasarath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & anr. reported in (2014) 9 SCC 129, the above said Magistrate had returned back the complaints to the petitioners on 23.8.2014 for re-presentation before the proper court. According to the petitioners, their counsel has taken back the complaint but the same was misplaced in the chambers and it could be retrieved later and the complaints were re-filed before the proper court (viz, Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sultan Bathery) on 10.12015 along with Criminal Miscellaneous Applications to condone the delay of 443 days in re-filing those complaints. The learned Magistrate as per the impugned orders passed in both these cases had rejected the said plea for condoning the delay and the reasonings thereof are given in para 5 of the order, which read as follows:

(3.) Heard Sri. M.R. Sarin Panicker, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners (complainants), Sri. Manuel Kanchiramattom, learned counsel appearing for R-1 (accused) and Sri. Jestin Mathew, learned Prosecutor appearing for R-2 State.