IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2010 / 18TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2462 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.863/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHERTHALA .................... PETITIONERS: ACCUSED: ----------------------- 1. PRASANNA CHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.KESAVAN NAIR, VALAVANAD VEEDU, KARUVATTA THEKKUM MURI, KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. PRATAP KRISHNAN @ KANNAN, S/O.PRASANNA CHANDRAN NAIR, VALAVANAD VEEDU, KARUVATTA THEKKUM MURI, KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. RAJAMMA, W/O.PRASANNA CHANDRAN NAIR, VALAVANAD VEEDU, KARUVATTA THEKKUM MURI KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. NARAYANANKUTTY KARTHA, S/O.DIVAKARA MENON, AMALA SADAN HOUSE, COCHIN CORPORATION WARD-35, VENNALA, PIN 682036 ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2462 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010 ORDER The petitioners who are the accused in CC.No.863/2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Cherthala which is a private complaint filed by the second respondent herein alleging an offence punishable under Section 379 read with Section 34 I.P.C. with regard to five trees allegedly cut and removed by the petitioners, seek to quash the proceedings against them. One of the contentions raised by the petitioners is that since the petitioners were residing beyond the territorial limits of the Magistrate, in the light of the amended provisions under Section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure the Magistrate was bound to conduct an enquiry under Section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure and no enquiry has been conducted. 2. A report from the Magistrate was called for by this Court. As per report dated 7/7/2010 the Magistrate has reported that after conducting an enquiry under Section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was taken on file. So Crl.M.C.No.2462/2010 : 2 : the said contention of the petitioners is unsustainable. 3. The Magistrate having taken cognizance of the offence, the proper course open to the petitioners is to plead for a discharge under Section 245 Cr.P.C at the appropriate stage. I am inclined to permit the petitioners to plead for a discharge in absentia. Accordingly the petitioners will be entitled to plead for a discharge through their counsel and the learned Magistrate shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioners at the stage of 245 Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners will be entitled to raise all contentions available to them in law before the Magistrate. This Criminal M.C. is disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj