IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2009 / 11TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 5037 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1417/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- KRISHNA PILLA, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O SANKARA PILLA, ANNAVI VEEDU, ANAKKALLU BHAGOM, KANJIRAPPALLY KARA, KANJIRAPPALLY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.JOHN (PALLOM) SMT.MIJI JOHN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------------ 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION. 2. HARIKUMAR, S/O MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 49, MATTAPPALLY VEEDU, THIRUVANCHOOR, MANAKADU, KOTTAYAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R1 & 3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 5037 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of January, 2009 O R D E R The petitioner is the sole accused and he faces indictment for offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 324 I.P.C. The defacto complainant is an advocate clerk. It is alleged that the accused was guilty of culpable behaviour against the said defacto complainant at the offence of the Advocate. Crime has been registered. Investigation is over. Final report has been filed. The petitioner has come to this Court now with a prayer that the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction available to this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the final report filed against him. The allegations are false. The very registration of the crime amounts to abuse of processes of the court. 2. Called upon to explain the nature of the circumstances that entitle the petitioner to the relief of quashing the final report, the learned counsel for the petitioner points out that there are Crl.M.C.No. 5037 of 2008 2 several incongruities, inconsistencies and contradictions in the versions of the defacto complainant before the police and the doctor. 3. I shall not embark on a detailed discussion on the alleged incongruities and inadequacies. Suffice it to say that I am not persuaded to agree that the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can, need or ought to be invoked in the facts and circumstances of this case. The investigation is now complete and final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate. The offences alleged include a warrant offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. 4. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am not persuaded to agree that there is any justification in the prayer for premature termination of proceedings by invocation of the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This I am satisfied is an eminently fit case where the petitioner must be relegated to claim premature termination by discharge under Section 239/240 cr.P.C. A more detailed discussion on facts does not appear to be necessary or warranted. Crl.M.C.No. 5037 of 2008 3 5. This Crl.M.C. is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that the dismissal of this Crl.M.C. will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to claim premature termination of the criminal prosecution against him by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. (R. BASANT) Judge tm