IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 3753 of 2007() ------------------------- CC.422/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI .................... PETITIONER: ----------------- M/S.SRI AYYAPPA PAPER COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,XL/1748,ERNAKULAM MERCHANTS UNION ROAD, BROADWAY,REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.A.R.K.N.PERIYAKARUPPAN. BY ADV. SRI.A.BALAGOPALAN SRI.A.RAJAGOPALAN RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. M/S.SIVA SAKTHI PACKAGES,A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT IB,3RD CROSS ROAD, KAMARAJ COLONY,HOSUR AND FACTORY AT 11TH K.M, KELAMANGALAM ROAD,AGGONDAPALLI (VIA),HCF, DENKANIKOTTAI T.K,DHARMAPURI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER A.VENKATESALU. 2. A.VENKATESALU,MANAGING PARTNER, M/S.SIVA SAKSTHI PACKAGES HAVING ITS OFFICE AT IB,3RD CROSS ROAD,KAMARAJ COLONY,HOSUR AND FACTORY AT IITH K.M,KELAMANGALAM ROAD, AGGONDAPALLI (VIA),HCF,DENKANIKOTTAI T.K, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.3753 of 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008 ORDER The petitioner who is the complainant in C.C.No.422 of 2002 on the file of J.F.C.M- II, Kochi for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 involving a cheque for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, seeks to quash Annexure A2 order dated 27.11.07 passed by the learned Magistrate and to direct the learned Magistrate to transfer the case to the Long Pending Register after complying with the statutory formalities. 2. The 1st accused is a partnership firm having its office at Denkanikottai in Dharmapuri district of Tamil Nadu. The 2nd accused, who is the Managing Partner of the said firm, is also residing in the said place. Summons to the accused were returned unserved. Non bailable warrants of arrest issued to them also returned unexecuted. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate initiated Crl.M.C.No. 3753 of 2007 2 steps under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. After completing the steps under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order dated 27.11.07. as follows: “Proclamation was affixed in the properties owned by the accused. The complainant shall take steps for the following. 1) to take steps to conduct the sale of the properties of the accused or to take steps to appoint a receiver to manage the property of the accused. 2) Take steps to issue NBW to the accused or 3) If possible, take warrant by hand and execute the same.” 3. The cheque amount itself was for an amount of Rs.25,000/- and the accused had issued the same towards the partial discharge of their liability Rs.4,46,077/-. The petitioner- complainant had done everything within his control to cause service of process on the accused. Even Section 82 & 83 steps have been completed. Under these circumstances, the learned Magistrate was not justified in directing the complainant to take Crl.M.C.No. 3753 of 2007 3 the aforementioned steps. The appropriate course should have been to transfer the case to the Long Pending Register and continue to repeat the warrants of arrest every three months. The learned Magistrate shall take steps to transfer the case to the Long Pending Register and act in accordance with law. This Crl.M.C is disposed of as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj