IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 106 of 2009() ------------------------ C.C.3662/55/08 OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, MUMBAI PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED --------------- JOSEPH VILANGADAN, 76 YEARS MANAGING PARTNER, ENKON ENGINEERING & CONTACTORS, MAMANGALAM CHURCH ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------- 1. PHENOMENAL HEALTH CARE SERVICE LTD., REG.OFFICE AT 101/A, DIVYA SMRUTI, LINK ROAD, MALAD-WEST, MUMBAI400064, THROUGH ITS MANAGER LEGAL CHHAYA SAGAR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.106 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2009 ORDER In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner wants this Court to issue directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C regarding a prosecution launched against him before a court at Mumbai. Called upon to explain how in the light of the decision in Meenakshi Sathish v. S.P.I [2007(1) KLT 890 (F.B)] this Court can entertain jurisdiction, the learned counsel for the petitioner only submits that the services were to be performed within the jurisdiction of this Court and hence relief can be granted. 2. I am afraid, there is no merit in that request. Meenakshi Sathish v. S.P.I clearly lays down that the jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India or Section 482 Cr.P.C cannot obviously be invoked to in respect of a proceedings pending before another court situated outside the jurisdiction of this Court where the proceedings are initiated. 3. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-