IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3045 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.371/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER: 11TH ACCUSED: ------------------------- MOHAMMEDKUTTY, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.MAKKAR HAJI, PANIKKAVEETTIL HOUSE, VENKIDANGU P.O., THRISSUR DIST., MANAGING DIRECTOR SAFA LODGE, KANJANI ROAD, AYYANTHOLE. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: STATE AND COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3045 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of August, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment for offences punishable under Sections 7 and 8 of the Kerala Gaming Act. Cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The petitioner has entered appearance and was enlarged on bail. According to the petitioner there is absolutely no material on the basis of which such an indictment against him is justified. According to him for the sole reason that he was the owner of a lodge and some people who had hired the lodge had indulged in the alleged culpable act, he is being proceeded against. It is prayed that proceedings against him may be quashed invoking the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 2. I have been taken through all the relevant inputs. Powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be invoked sparingly and in exceptional cases in the interests of justice. Every person 2 claiming premature termination of proceedings is not entitled for the invocation of such extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction. Premature termination can be claimed under the ordinary provisions of Cr.P.C. In a summons case instituted otherwise than upon a complaint, a person against whom an indictment is raised can claim premature termination under Section 258 Cr.P.C. In the decision in Kamala Rajaram v. State of Kerala (2005 (3) KLT 617) this Court has clarified that premature termination of proceedings can be claimed by an indictee facing criminal prosecution in a summons case instituted otherwise than upon a complaint by resort under Section 258 Cr.P.C. I am of the opinion that the petitioner herein must also claim premature termination under Section 258Cr.P.C. by stoppage of proceedings. I am not persuaded to agree that the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C. can or need be invoked in the matter. 3. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed. But I may hasten to observe that the petitioner's claim for stoppage of proceedings under Section 258 cr.P.C. must be considered on merits and appropriate decision taken by the learned Magistrate expeditiously. Until such time, 3 I further direct that the personal presence of the petitioner need not be insisted and the petitioner must be permitted to appear through his counsel. (R. BASANT) Judge tm