IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2111 of 2010() ------------------------- CRIME NO.294/2010 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- GITH.M.R,AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR,MADATHIL HOUSE,P.P.ESTHOSE ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.T.N.SURESH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. THE S.I.OF POLICE,MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. MR.FAIZAL,S/O.UMMERKUTTY,MECHERIMADATHIL VEEDU,VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE,MUVTTUPUZHA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.C.S.HRITHIK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2111 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010 ORDER Petitioner seeks to quash Annexure A2 FIR registered by the Muvattupuzha Police Station as Crime No.294/2010 under the caption “man missing”. According to the petitioner, he has never been missing from his residence and that the 2nd respondent is behind the registration of the above FIR. The petitioner would allege that the 2nd respondent has been giving false propaganda to the effect that the petitioner is missing and his photographs are being widely published as missing. 2. The registration of an FIR under the caption “man missing” does not strictly amount to the registration of a crime. The petitioner would have it that even after the family members informed the Sub Inspector of Police, Muvattupuzha that the petitioner is not missing, the police at the instance of the 2nd respondent is maintaining the stand that the petitioner is missing. Even before this court has issued notice in this petition, the 2nd respondent has entered appearance through counsel. The 2nd respondent would say that the petitioner, Crl.M.C. No. 2111 of 2010 : 2 : who was acting as an agent of the 2nd respondent had cheated the 2nd respondent for an amount of Rs.35,00,000/-. The petitioner denies the said allegation. If the 2nd respondent has got a case that the petitioner has committed any offence, his remedy is to initiate appropriate legal proceedings in that direction. The petitioner may appear before the J.F.C.M Court, Muvattupuzha and show that Annexure A2 FIR has been falsely registered by the Muvattupuzha Police. In case the learned Magistrate is convinced about the contentions of the petitioner he shall drop the proceedings whereupon Annexure A2 FIR will stand quashed. This Criminal M.C is disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE dmb