IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2010 / 7TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3738 of 2008() ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MRS.SHOBHA, AGED 28 YEARS, W/O.SHINU BANERJEE, NEDUMPALLY QUARTERS, NEAR ANGEL SERVICE STATION, MYSORE ROAD, SULTAN BATHERY, WAYNADU DISTRICT, KERALA STATE. BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. NAVARATHAN KUMAR.M, AGED 44 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S. MICRO MEDICA, XL/4161-E, IST FLOOR, ELLEN'S BUILDING, FLOWER JUNCTION, T.D.ROAD, ERNAKULAM 682 035. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682 031. ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 3738 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of January, 2010. ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to have the complaint in S.T.663 of 2008 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-IV, Ernakulam struck off from file. 2. Petitioner is being prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. She is shown in the complaint as the Proprietrix of Thejus Pharma and she is said to have issued the cheque in that capacity. Cognizance of the offence was taken by the court below and summons was issued. On receipt of summons, petitioner has approached this court for the relief already made mention of. 3. According to the petitioner, she did not have an account with the Bank in respect of which the cheque was issued. It is also stated that she is not the Proprietrix of the Crl.M.C3738/2008. 2 concern and she has nothing to do with the transaction. She has been unnecessarily harassed by the complainant. 4. All these are disputed questions of fact, which the petitioner may urge before the court below. With liberty to do so, this petition is dismissed. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.