M.O. Joseph vs State of Kerala and Joshy George

M. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.—By Annexure-A4 order, Judicial First Class Magistrate, Pala permitted the complainant to adduce further

evidence, after closing the defence evidence. This petition is filed u/s 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A4 order contending

that said order was passed in Annexure-A2 petition, which is a petition to review the earlier order. As learned Magistrate has no power to review

the earlier order, Annexure-A4 order is to be quashed.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner argued that as learned Magistrate could not have reviewed the earlier order, Annexure-A4 order

is liable to be quashed. Learned Counsel also argued that it is not a speaking order and it does not disclose for what purpose complainant was

permitted to adduce further evidence.

Though Annexure-A2 petition is filed to review the previous order, by Annexure-A4 order, learned Magistrate has not reviewed the previous

order. Annexure-A4 order shows that finding that in the interest of justice complainant is to be permitted to adduce further evidence, complainant

was permitted to adduce further evidence. It was also made clear by the learned Magistrate that accused is also entitled to adduce further

evidence, if necessary.

Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure enables the Magistrate to permit the complainant to adduce further evidence, if it is just and

necessary at any stage. The order shows that learned Magistrate, finding that in the interest of justice complainant is to be permitted to adduce

further evidence, permission was granted to adduce further evidence. In such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with Annexure-

A4 order.

Petition is dismissed.