IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2870 of 2009 ---------------------------------- [M.C. NO.1/2006 IN CC.NO.1815/2000 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM) .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- SUNIR.C.M., S/O.MOIDU, AGED 32 YEARS, BUSINESS, AZAD MANZIL, V.K.BAVA LANE, ERNAKULAM NORTH P.O., ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.M.ZIRAJ. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2870 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 17th September 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash M.C.1/2006 initiated by learned Magistrate in C.C.1815/2000. Petitioner admittedly obtained interim custody of the motor cycle No.KL-7-Q-9528 under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure on executing a bond undertaking to produce it as and when required. It is not disputed that when the learned Magistrate directed the petitioner to produce the said motor cycle, it was not produced and petitioner reported that it was sold. It is in such circumstances, learned Magistrate initiated proceedings as M.C.1/2006. Argument of the learned counsel appearing for petitioner is that C.C.1815/2000 ended in acquittal and in such circumstances, the proceedings is to be quashed. Irrespective of the result in C.C.1815/2000, when petitioner with open eyes executed a bond and obtained interim custody of the motor cycle, CRMC 2870/09 2 undertaking to produce as and when required and failed to produce it when asked for, action of the learned Magistrate initiating proceedings for non production of the vehicle, cannot be quashed invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court. Question whether based in view of the order of acquittal, whether petitioner is to be shown leniency is to be decided by the learned Magistrate. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.