O.P.(Crl.) No.
609 of 2025
1
2025:KER:66649
“CR”
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 18TH BHADRA, 1947
OP(CRL.) NO. 609 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN ST NO.789 OF 2023
OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (E&O),ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
PRASANTH ANDREWS
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O ANDRES,MALIYEKKAL VERTHODEN, ANCHERICHIRA,
KURIACHIRA P.O., THRISSUR @35/147,MUNDADAN
TOWER,PALLIKULAM ROAD,THRISSUR,PIN-682035,
PIN - 680006
BY ADVS.
SHRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL
SMT.SHYLA SHAFFEQ
SRI.I.J.AUGUSTINE
SRI.M.B.SOORI
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
AYYAPPAN PILLAI
AGED 76 YEARS
S/O. GOPALA PILLAI, PROPRIETOR, M/S. HINDUSTAN
AGENCIES RESIDING AT 'MATHILAKAM', JAYANAGAR,
MARADU P.O., KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 682304
THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
2
2025:KER:66649
“CR”
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
O.P.(Crl) No.609 of 2025
-------------------------------
th
Dated this the 9 day of September, 2025
JUDGMENT
It is true that the judiciary is facing docket explosions, and
every judicial officer should strive to dispose of cases without
adjourning cases at the instance of parties for frivolous reasons.
But, while trying to dispose of the cases, the court should bear in
mind that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to
be done. It emphasises the importance of transparency and
perception in the administration of justice. Even if a case is
dismissed or allowed, parties should leave the court premises
with a feeling that they obtained a fair chance to contest their
case. Then only the system will prevail. That is the success of the
justice delivery system.
2. The petitioner is an accused in ST No.789 of 2023 on
the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (E&O)
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
3
2025:KER:66649
Ernakulam. It was a prosecution initiated under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Ext.P1 is the complaint.
The trial in the above case started on 04.02.2025, and the
complainant was examined as PW1. Exts.P1 to P61 were marked
on the side of the complainant. After the closure of evidence of
the complainant and during the examination of the petitioner
under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the petitioner explained that the
subject cheques in question were originally handed over to one
Shivasubramaniam. It is the case of the petitioner that the
complainant, after obtaining the cheque from Shivasubramaniam,
filled it and presented the cheque, which resulted in the initiation
of the present prosecution. Shivasubramaniam was summoned
and examined as DW1. During the said examination, it is
submitted that printouts of the screenshots of WhatsApp chat
between the petitioner and DW1 were shown to DW1. DW1
admitted the phone number on the said printout. The printouts of
the screenshots of the WhatsApp chat between the petitioner and
DW1 were not marked is the grievance of the petitioner. Hence,
on 05.08.2025, when the case was posted for hearing, the
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
4
2025:KER:66649
petitioner filed Ext.P2 application to reopen the evidence for the
purpose of marking the printouts of the screenshots of the
WhatsApp chat. Ext.P2(a) is produced herein as the printouts of
the screenshots of the WhatsApp chat.
3. According to the petitioner, on 05.08.2025, the
learned Magistrate, without considering Ext.P2, proceeded with
the hearing and the case was posted to 07.08.2025 for further
hearing. On 07.08.2025, the learned Magistrate posted the case
to 12.08.2025 for judgment without passing any orders in Ext.P2.
Hence, the petitioner filed O.P.(Crl.) No.539 of 2025 before this
Court, which resulted in the Ext.P3 judgment. Now the grievance
of the petitioner is that, as directed by this court, the Ext.P2
application was considered by the learned Magistrate on
08.09.2025 and dismissed that application at 3.15 p.m. on that
day, and the case was posted to 09.09.2025 for judgment. The
petitioner submitted that he filed an application for a certified
copy as evidenced by Ext.P4, on 08.09.2025 itself. But without
issuing a certified copy, the learned Magistrate is going to deliver
the judgment today, is the grievance. This original petition was
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
5
2025:KER:66649
considered by this Court at 10:25 a.m. on 09.09.2025.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The way in which this original petition is going to be
disposed of, I am of the opinion that no notice is necessary to the
respondent. If the respondent is aggrieved by any of the
directions issued in this judgment, the respondent is free to file a
review petition.
6. This Court, as per the Ext.P3 judgment, issued the
following direction:
“I) The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (E&O),
Ernakulam is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders in
Ext.P2, if it is pending as on today, as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt
of a certified copy of this judgment.”
7. The grievance of the petitioner is that Ext.P2 was
dismissed yesterday (08.08.2025), and without serving a copy of
the order, the case is posted for judgment today (09.09.2025) at
11:00 a.m. It is clear that the petitioner is very much interested
in the outcome of the Ext P2 petition, and that is why he
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
6
2025:KER:66649
approached this court earlier, which resulted in the Ext P3
judgment. If Ext. P2 is dismissed, the court ought to have issued
a copy of the order immediately. I am dissatisfied with the way in
which the learned Magistrate shows haste in disposing of this
case. As I mentioned earlier, justice should not only be done but
should also appear to be done. Whether this Court will interfere
with the order passed in Ext.P2 is a different matter. When the
petitioner filed an application and there was a delay in passing
orders on it, the petitioner approached this Court, and this Court
directed that the said application be disposed of immediately. In
such circumstances, the learned Magistrate ought not to have
taken such haste to dispose of the main case itself by dismissing
the petition yesterday and posting the case for judgment today.
This practice is not proper. Heaven will not fall down if the
pronouncement of the final verdict is made after serving a copy
of the order passed in Ext. P2.
8. I am of the considered opinion that the order passed
in Ext.P2 should be given to the petitioner within three days, and
the pronouncement of the judgment should be deferred for a
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
7
2025:KER:66649
period of two weeks. The petitioner is free to file an affidavit
before the jurisdictional court about this order, and the learned
Magistrate shall defer the pronouncement of judgment. The
Registry will also inform the office of the Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate (E&O) Ernakulam over the phone and communicate to
the learned magistrate that the judgment shall not be
pronounced today in ST No.789 of 2023.
Therefore, this original petition is disposed of with the
following directions:
1. The certified copy of the order passed in Ext.P2 shall
be served to the petitioner within three days from
today, if a proper application for the same is filed.
2. The pronouncement of the judgment in ST No.789 of
2023 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (E&O)
Ernakulam is deferred for a period of two weeks from
today.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE
SMF
O.P.(Crl.) No.609 of 2025
8
2025:KER:66649
APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 609/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
5/12/2023 ON THE FILE OF
ACJM(EO),ERNAKUALM
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CRL MP 3450/2025
DATED 05/08/2025 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED
Exhibit P2(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF
WHATSAPP CHAT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER
/ACCUSED WITH AFFIDAVIT U/S 63 OF
BHARATHEEYA SAKSHYA ADHINYAM,2023
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT IN OP(CRL)539/2025 DATED
27.08.2025
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
8/9/2025 FOR ISSUANCE OF CERTIFIED COPY
OF THE ORDER IN EXHIBIT P2 CRL MP
