IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 16TH OCTOBER 2008 / 24TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3734 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1865/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.T.JOSEPH , PRESIDENT, KERALA STATE PULSES AND SPICES SUPPLIERS ASSOCIATION INDO-SCOTTISH BRANDY (DISTILLERY) PVT.LTD. KARUVELIPPADY, KOCHI-05. BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION MAVELI BHAVAN, GANDHI NAGAR, KOCHI-20. BY ADV. SRI. K.P. DANDAPANI (SR) – SC, SUPPLY CO FOR R2 ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 3734 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of October, 2008 ORDER The petitioner is the 2nd accused in a prosecution for offences punishable under Secs.403, 409 and 418 read with Sec.34 IPC. The same has been registered as C.C.No.1865/07. Altogether, there are 2 accused persons in that crime. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a private complaint filed by the 2nd respondent herein. Earlier, cognizance was taken; but another Bench of this Court as per the order dated 3/3/06 in Crl.M.C.No.4200/05 (Annexure-2) had set aside the order taking cognizance and had directed the learned Magistrate to consider the question of cognizance and issue of process afresh. It is accordingly that cognizance was taken (under Annexure-3 order) and the Calendar Case was registered against the petitioner and his co-accused. The petitioner has Crl.M.C. No. 3734 of 2008 -: 2 :- come to this Court now with a prayer that powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to bring to premature termination the proceedings against the petitioner. 2. I find that the prayer of the petitioner for premature termination of the proceedings does deserve to be considered in detail. It is brought to my notice that the co-accused has also come to this Court and another Bench of this Court as per the order dated 9/4/08 in Crl.M.C.1552/08 had disposed of the said Crl.M.C. with the observation that the accused can claim discharge in absentia. In the light of that direction, I am satisfied that the interests of justice will be eminently served by permitting the petitioner also to claim such discharge in absentia. 3. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the specific observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to appear before the learned Magistrate through counsel and claim discharge at the stage of Sec.245(2) or Sec.245(1) Cr.P.C. The petitioner can apply for exemption from personal appearance and the learned Magistrate shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioner if he is represented by counsel until a decision is taken on the question of framing charge. Only if the learned Magistrate feels that charges are liable to be framed Crl.M.C. No. 3734 of 2008 -: 3 :- under Sec.246 Cr.P.C. and the petitioner is not entitled for discharge, need the personal presence of the petitioner be insisted. Until then, the petitioner shall be permitted to appear through counsel. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge