IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4001 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.612/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, SULTHANBATHERY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 AND 3 ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THANKACHAN @ CHACKO, MANKUZHIKARIYIL HOUSE, THANNIRMUKKAM P.O., CHERTHALA. 2. LEELAMMA CHACKO, W/O.THANKACHAN, MANKUZHIKARIYIL HOUSE, THANNIRMUKKAM P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. MR.JOBY CYRIAC RESPONDENT(S): STATE OF KERALA: --------------------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4001 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 10th day of December,2009 ORDER Petitioners are the accused 1 and 3 in C.C.612/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sulthanbatheri taken cognizance for the offence under sections 468,471,420, 511 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that nine accused in furtherance of their common intention to make wrongful gain, forged revenue documents on various dates in respect of landed properties and by using the forged documents attempted to cheat the Manager of the Kerala State Financial Enterprises, Sulthanbatheri Branch by obtaining a loan and thereby committed the offences. By Annexure A1 judgment dated 29.11.2006, except petitioners the other accused were tried and acquitted by the learned Magistrate. The case as against the petitioners was refiled as C.C.612/2006. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings as against the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners Crl.M.C.4001/2009 2 was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel is that in view of Annexure A1 judgment acquitting the co-accused and the non availability of the records, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 4. Based on an order of acquittal as against the co- accused the absconding accused are not entitled to get their case quashed. It is up to the petitioners to raise the contentions before the learned Magistrate at the time of trial. Learned counsel then submitted that petitioners may be permitted to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate and seek an order of discharge and their presence may be dispensed with. It is up to the petitioners to seek exemption from the learned Magistrate and seek an order of discharge under section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure, if charge has not been framed as against them. Petitioners are at liberty to raise all the contentions before the Magistrate. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006