IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3483 of 2010() ------------------------------------- C.C.216/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, HOSDURG. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------ 1. SHAJAHAN. P.K., 33 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED KUTTY, KALADITHARA, SHUKAPURAM, P.O.EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. ABOOLAIZE. P., S/O.MOHAMMED ALI, EDAPPAL, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SRI.M. REVIKRISHNAN, SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. AZEEZ KANNAMKULAM, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED HAJI, NEAR A.L.P.SCHOOL, KARIPODY, P.O.BEKAL, PALLIKKERELL VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 3483 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 1st day of November,2010 ORDER Petitioners are the accused in C.C.216/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg taken cognizance for the offences under sections 420, 465, 468, 384 and 120B of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A complaint. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that complaint is filed without any bona fides after petitioner instituted proceedings under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. It is contended that learned Magistrate should not have taken cognizance without conducting an inquiry under section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Crl.M.C.3483/2010 2 petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. A report was called for from Judicial First Class Magistrate whether an inquiry under section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure was conducted. The report of the learned Magistrate shows that inquiry under section 202 of Code of Criminal Procedure was conducted and only thereafter cognizance was taken. 4. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find it for this court to exercise the inherent power under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are entitled to raise all the contentions raised herein and seek an order of discharge from the learned Magistrate. Petitioners are also granted liberty to file an application under section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Magistrate to dispense with their presence, for the purpose of filing an application under section 245(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure and to seek an order of Crl.M.C.3483/2010 3 discharge. If such an application is filed, learned Magistrate not to insist for the personal presence of the petitioners for that limited purpose. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006