IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 15TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1697 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN LP.2/2004 TO 5/2004 IN LP.2/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -I, ALAPPUZHA .................... (CRIME NOS.139/2000,140/2000,141/2000 & 142/2000 OF SOUTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA) PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. NINAN THAYYIL, AGED 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT B.46, RAJENDER NAGAR, MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 068. 2. JAMES J.THAYYIL, AGED 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT B.186, RAJENDER NAGAR MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 068. BY ADVS. MR.VELLAYANI SUNDARA RAJU, SMT.P.MEENAKUMARI. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. C.M.KAMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.BHAVADASAN, J. --------------------------- Crl.M.C No.1697 OF 2008 -------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February 2010 ----------------------------------------------------- ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to have Annexure 1 to 4 and Annexure 5 to 8 final reports so far as the petitioner concerned in L.P No.2/2005, 3/2005, 4/2005 and 5/2005 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alappuzha quashed. 2. Petitioners say that they are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime Nos. 139/2000, 140/2000, 141/2000 and 142/2000 of the Alappuzha South Police Station for having committed offences punishable under Sections 120(b), 420 and 34 IPC. The allegation is that the petitioners had cheated the defacto complainant who were four in number by promising visa. Petitioners say that they were unaware of the proceedings and therefore they did not attend the court. They were never informed by anybody about the framing of charge against them. Unexpectedly it was mentioned by one of the friends of 2nd petitioner and he learned that cases are pending against him. Petitioners say that they have nothing to do with the incident alleged by the complainant and they were falsely implicated with ulterior motives. 3. Petitioners say that they were working in an exporting company named Phoenix exporters in New Delhi for the Crl.M.C No.1697 OF 2008 Page numbers past 14 to 21 years. Petitioners pray that the proceedings against them may be quashed. 4. From the records made available, it can be seen that cognizance was taken on police report filed after investigation in a complaint sent from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court concerned. Cognizance was taken of offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420 r/w 34 IPC. Apart from the petitioner there were three other accused persons. Since the petitioners were not available for trial, the case was split up and later included in L.P category. Warrant must be pending against them. 5. If the petitioners have a case that they have not received summons and they were unaware of the proceedings it is for them to appear before the court below and appraise the court of the true facts and seek appropriate reliefs. As of now it is not possible to accept the contentions of the petitioners that they are innocent and they have been falsely implicated. 6. So also that they were unaware of the proceedings is true. Reserving the right of the petitioners to appear before the court below and seek appropriate reliefs, this petition is closed. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, //TRUE COPY// JUDGE vdv P.A TO JUDGE