IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2544 of 2010() ------------------------- CRMP.5008/2009 OF JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVALLA ............... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3: ------------------------------------------------------- 1. DR.BINOY IDICULA BABU AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.IDICULA BABU RESIDING AT PUTHENPURAKKAL KUTTIYIL HOUSE PAZHAVANGADI PO, RANNI TALUK. 2. IDICULA BABU AGED 64 YEARS, PUTHENPURAKKAL KUTTIYIL HOUSE PAZHAVANGADI PO, RANNI TALUK. 3. ROHINY BABU AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.IDICULA BABU RESIDING AT PUTHENPURAKKAL KUTTIYIL HOUSE PAZHAVANGADI PO, RANNI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENTS / STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION. 2. SMT. NISHA SAIRA BENOY D/O.P.S.JACOB, PALAKKAL HOUSE RAILWAY STATION PO, THIRUVALLA 689 111. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. -------------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.2544 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2010. O R D E R Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.820 of 2009 of Thiruvalla Police Station taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR and further proceedings. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that Final report under Section 173(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure originally submitted on 19.4.2010 was returned and it was later re-submitted on 11.10.2010 and cognizance of the offence was taken. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on verification admitted that fact. In such circumstances, granting liberty to the petitioner to seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the petition is disposed. If petitioners file an application under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to dispense with their presence for the purpose of claiming an order under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure, learned Magistrate shall not insist for their presence for that limited purpose. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE mns