IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2009 / 6TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1845 of 2009(E) ------------------------------------ CC.815/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM ............................................... PETITIONER(S): IST ACCUSED -------------------------------------------- M.P.USHA,D/O.PALLIYAN,AGED 43, MARIYIL HOUSE,PANGODE.PO,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE MANAGER,INTEGRATED FINANCE COMPANY LTD,BUILDING NO.39/.5682,RAVIPURAM JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION,REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No.1845 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 28th day of July,2009 ORDER Petitioner is the first accused and first respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.815/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam. Based on the First Information Statement recorded from the first respondent, Crime 627/2002 was registered for the offence under section 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure A2 final report was submitted which was taken cognizance by the learned Magistrate. Petitioner had purchased a Toyota Qualis Van bearing reg. No.KL 7 AF 7638 on hire purchase from the first respondent. Case of the first respondent is that out of Rs.4,60,000/- payable only Rs.89,850/- was paid and in violation of the agreement petitioner hypothecated the vehicle in favour of Josy George and thereby committed offences under section 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that first respondent had repossessed the vehicle and sold it and realised the Crl.M.C.1845/2009 2 entire amount due and prosecution under section 138 of Code of Criminal Procedure which was initiated was quashed under Annexure A5 order dated 10.10.2007 and in such circumstance, continuation of the proceeding is only an abuse of process of court. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Annexure A5 order in Crl.M.C.2517/2005 shows that Toyota Qualis Van was repossessed by the first respondent on 25.2.2003 and thereafter it was sold and the amount due realised. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that the entire amount due from the petitioner has already been realised. In the light of the submission it is not necessary to continue the proceedings when the prosecution case only shows that it was a civil liability as contention is that in violation of the terms of hire purchase agreement, when liability to the owner was subsisting it was hypothecated. If so even if petitioner is to be tried, there is no likelihood of a conviction. In such circumstance, in the interest of justice, petition is allowed. C.C.815/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Ernakulam is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- Crl.M.C.1845/2009 3 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006