IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3362 of 2010(A) -------------------------------- CC.689/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ALUVA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ------------------------------ LAIJU K., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.DR.K.M.AHAMMED, KAROTHUKUZHY HOUSE, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA. BY ADVS. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM SRI.JYOTHISH.J.KALLINGAL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION, ALUVA, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. 2. GEORGE XAVIER, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.XAVIER, NORTH OF MANGALAPPUZHA BRIDGE, CHENGAMMANAD, ALUVA. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. REKHA C. NAIR R2 BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3362 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.689/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Aluva, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-AI final report. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that the allegations in the final report do not disclose the ingredients of the offences and even though the case is pending and non bailable warrant was issued for examination of the second respondent, the defacto complainant, he did not appear and in such circumstances, the attempt is only to harass the petitioner and hence, it is to be quashed. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that second respondent is not interested in prosecuting the case further and therefore, appropriate orders may be passed. CRMC 3362/10 2 3. Annexure-AII proceeding paper of the learned Magistrate shows that charge for the offences was framed on 1.1.2009 and the case was repeatedly being posted for examination of the prosecution witnesses and in spite of non bailable warrant issued, they did not appear. It is seen that on 11.8.2009 the case was adjourned to 22.9.2009 and issued non bailable warrant to the witnesses and again to 4.11.2009 and as last chance to 8.12.2009 and thereafter to 13.1.2010 and then to 10.2.2010 and even thereafter, there were more than five postings. Still, the witnesses did not appear. 4. In the light of the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent, when the defacto complainant himself is not intending to give evidence, Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva is directed to dispose the case on the next posting date, if the second respondent has not appeared and given the evidence, taking that there is no evidence in respect of the prosecution case. Petition is disposed. 28th September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv