IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 564 of 2009 ------------------------------- CP.1/2009 OF JUDL.FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, MANANTHAVADY .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 3 & 4: -------------------------------------------------- 1. NAGARAJAN @ P.N.RAJAN, S/O.VENKATACHALA PILLA, "GOPAL NIWAS", GAS ROAD, ERUMATHERUVE, MANANTHAWADY. 2. VISWANATHAN @ KANNAN, S/O.VENKATACHALA PILLA, "GOPAL NIWAS", D.N.QUARTERS, OZHAYANGADY, MANANTHAWADY. BY ADV. SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.564 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 13th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT This petition is filed to quash the final report in O.R.No.7 of 2007 of the Excise Range, Mananthawady which is pending trial as C.P.No.1 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mananthawady. Annexure A1 is the charge sheet and the present petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.3 and 4. It is seen that about 350 litres of illicit spirit was being transported when the excise party intercepted and accused Nos.1 and 2 were caught hold of. It is also stated that accused Nos.3 and 4, the present petitioners, had made arrangements for the purchase of the spirit, and for the purpose of transporting they had abetted and aided the other accused. It is specifically stated in the charge that accused Nos.3 and 4 had made arrangements for transportation of the spirit by giving money and has helped and abetted accused Nos.1 and 2 and, therefore, Section 61 of the Abkari Act also will be attracted. 2. At this stage, I do not propose to give my views Crl.M.C.No.564 of 2009 2 on merits for the reason that I do not find any ground to quash the proceeding as such. But when the case is committed and it comes up before the Sessions Court, necessarily there has to be a hearing under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before framing of charge and certainly the petitioners will be entitled to raise the plea of discharge which the court has to consider on the materials available on record as contemplated under Section 227(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vns