IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1918 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.191/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -I, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. PRAMODKUMAR SABU, S/O. M.P. SABU, AGED 51 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, PRAMOD (TEXTILE) AGENCIES, 18/253A, THREEFIVE BUILDING,THALI ROAD, CALICUT-673002. 2. M. SUCHEENDRAN, S/O. PERAVAKUTTY, MANAGER, PRAMOD (TEXTILE) AGENCIES, AGED 43 YEARS, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KASABA AMSOM, DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. MUHAMMED BABU, S/O. BASHEER, AGED 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.B.MANSION, VELLAKKINAR, ALAPPUZHA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.1918 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008 ORDER Petitioners face indictment in a prosecution alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 468 and 471 I.P.C. The petitioners had initiated two prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the 1st respondent herein. Those proceedings ended in acquittal. Even earlier the complainant herein had filed a private complaint alleging that the offences under Sections 468 and 471 I.P.C are committed in respect of such cheques. The learned Magistrate conducted an enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C and it is submitted at the Bar that the said complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. The complainant later filed a revision petition. The same was allowed. The Magistrate later took cognizance. Prosecution against the petitioners is pending as C.C.191 of 2007. Consequent to non appearance of the petitioners, coercive processes have been issued against the petitioners. The petitioners find such processes chasing them now. Crl.M.C. No.1918 of 2008 2 2. According to the petitioners, they are absolutely innocent. The proceedings are liable to be quashed. At any rate, the petitioners are willing to surrender and seek regular bail. There may be a direction to consider the application for regular bail on the date of surrender itself, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. I have considered all the relevant inputs. The specific allegation is that the date put on a cheque has been altered from 16.07.99 to 16.04.04 and the same has been used as genuine. The correction of date amounts to a forgery. Such forged document was used as genuine by the accused with full knowledge that it was a forged one, it is alleged. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations are untrue and that, at any rate, the petitioners do not deserve to endure the trauma of such prosecution. It is prayed that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be issued to bring to premature termination such prosecution. 5. I am unable to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners. At the moment and with the available inputs, I am unable to find any justification to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C and bring the proceedings to premature termination. Crl.M.C. No.1918 of 2008 3 It is for the petitioners to appear before the learned Magistrate and claim discharge under Section 245 (2) or 245 (1) Cr.P.C as the case may be or acquittal at later stages. I am unable to perceive any features which would justify invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners. 6. This Crl.M.C is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioners appear before the learned Magistrate and apply for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-