IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4544 of 2003(C) -------------------------------------- [CC.NO.265/2003 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, PUNALUR] .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.2 & 3: -------------------------------------------------- 1. SHUHAIB,S/O.ALUKUTTY HAJI, AGED 53,KOOTTAPLACKAL VEEDU, PULLOOR,THALAKKAD, TIRUR TALUK. 2. JAFFER,S/O.SHUHAIB, AGED 26,KOTTAPLACKAL VEEDU,PULLOOR, THALAKKAD,TIRUR TALUK. BY ADV. MR.K.P.MUJEEB. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. BASHEER, S/O.SHAMSUDDIN,AGE 37,VALAKKODE VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. JIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. A.K.BASHEER, J. ------------------------ CRL.M.C. NO. 4544 OF 2003 --------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are stated to be facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code in C.C No.265 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Punalur. 2. The case of the complainant appears to be that the accused had extracted a sum of Rs.1,81,500/- from him on the assurance that they would procure him a visa to go abroad. 3. It is pointed out by the learned Counsel that accused No.1 had subsequently paid off the entire amount to the complainant. This was admitted by the complainant before the trial court when he was examined in the case on 28-2-2003. Annexure B is stated to be the deposition of the complainant in this regard. Annexure A judgment of the court below will reveal that accused No.1 was accordingly found not guilty and acquitted of the charge levelled against him. CRL.M.C. NO. 4544 OF 2003 2 4. The case of the Petitioners is that they were not available in the country at the time when the case against their co-accused was taken up for consideration. They pray that the proceedings pending against them may be quashed since the main culprit has already been acquitted. 5. I am of the opinion that the above contention cannot be sustained. The Petitioners have to necessarily appear before the court below and face trial. The inherent power under Sec.482 of the Code cannot be a panacea for all perceived ills and grievances, most of which fall in the realm of apprehensions. Petitioners have to approach the trial court for appropriate reliefs. There is no merit in this petition, and therefore it is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER JUDGE pkk