IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4546 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.329/2009 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------------- P.K.ALIKUNJU, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.KOCHAHAMMED, RESIDING AT PUNNEKOTTAYIL HOUSE, VARAPETTY P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.C.A.MAJEED SRI.K.H.ASIF RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 686991. 3. V.S.RAMLA BEEVI, AGED 45 YEARS, VARAPPOTHE HOUSE, KAVUNGAL PARAMBU, CHELAKKULAM - WEST, VENGOLA, NOW RESIDING AT PULIYELIL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT – 686991. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. -------------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.4546 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November, 2010. O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.329 of 2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kothamangalam, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-C final report. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that though in Annexure-A complaint, third respondent alleged that the seven accused persons committed various offences, on investigation final report was submitted only against the petitioner, the husband and the materials produced before the court do not disclose the ingredients of the offence against the petitioner and therefore it is to be quashed. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of Code of Criminal Procedure establishes that petitioner was not at the place as alleged by the third respondent at the time when the incident occurred and in such circumstances, the case set up by the third respondent should not have been accepted. Crl.M.C No.4546 OF 200 2 2. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find it for this Court to appreciate the evidence and disbelieve the case of the third respondent and quash the proceedings as sought for. Petitioner is at liberty to raise all the contentions raised herein, before the learned Magistrate and claims discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure to discharge him. Petition is disposed granting liberty to the petitioner to file a petition under Section 239 of code of Criminal Procedure for discharge raising all the contentions raised herein. If the petitioner files an application under 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to dispense with his presence for that purpose, Judicial First Class Magistrate not to insist for the presence of the petitioner, for that limited purpose. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. mns