IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2010 / 12TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 7607 of 2010(Q) C.C.NO.1412/2009 ON THE FILE THE JFCM, CHALAKUDY CMP.14640/2008 of J.M.F.C. - I, CHALAKUDY .................... PETITIONER(S): 1. PAULOSE, S/O.KAITHARATH MANAPURAM VAREETH, AGED 62 YEARS.EAST CHALAKUDY VILLAGE AND DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. MARIYAMMA, W/O.KATIHARATH MANAPURAM PAULOSE, AGED 45 YEARS, EAST CHALAKUDY VILLAGE AND DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. SHIKU, S/O.KAITHARATH MANAPURAM PAULOSE, AGED 15 YEARS, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, PAULOSE (1ST PETITIONER) EAST CHALAKUDY VILLAGE AND DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU RESPONDENT(S): 1. ANEESH, S/O.CHANDRAN, AGED 27 YEARS, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOODAPUZHA DEESOM, CHALAKUDY. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKKUDY. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.S.HRITHWICK FOR R3 SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(c).No.7607 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 2 nd day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioners, who are the accused in C.C.No.1412/2009 on the file of the J.F.C.M, Chalakudy seek to quash all further proceedings. 2. According to the petitioners, the above case is a counter-blast to Crime No.448/2008 of Chalakudy Police Station in which the 1st respondent had attacked the petitioners with dangerous weapons on being questioned by the petitioners for unnecessarily trespassing into their property and chopping off the branches. 3. In as much as the learned Magistrate has already taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 341,323, 324, 506(ii) and 294(b) read with 34 IPC, the proper course for the petitioner is to plead for discharge. Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to plead for a discharge in absentia. In case the W.P.(c) No. 7607 of 2010 2 petitioners file an application for discharge through their counsel, the learned Magistrate shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioner for the disposal of the discharge petition. Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj