IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 3319 of 2007() ------------------------- CMP.403/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ALATHUR .................... PETITIONER: ---------------------- P.C.JAMES, HOUSE NO.M.53, MAYITHRI BHAVAN, THOTTINKAL, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.N.SUKUMARAN SRI.S.SHYAM SRI.N.K.KARNIS RESPONDENTS: --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PADAGIRI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTIONS, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. JOHNY GEORGE ALIAS DOMINIC, S/O GEORGE, THACHILETH HOUSE, MANJALLOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ADB, PALAKKADU. 4. THE MARKETING MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, ADB, PALAKKADU. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.NOBLE MATHEW THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.3319 of 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of January, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, who is the first accused in Crime No.20/2007 of Padagiri Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 474 read with 34 IPC seeks to quash Annexure A1-complaint as well as AII- order passed by the Magistrate forwarding the complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C and AIII- FIR registered by the Padagiri Police. 2. According to the petitioner, Annexure I complaint as well as Annexure A III-FIR do not make out any of the offences alleged against the petitioner. 3. It is too early to hold that Annexure AI complaint as well as Annexure A III-FIR do not disclose the offences alleged. Those annexures are only the threshold documents on the basis of which the Police has commenced the investigation. The investigation has not been completed. It is only when a police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C is filed and the accused is charge sheeted, and the Court takes cognizance of Crl.M.C.No. 3319 of 2007 2 the offence could it be said that the accused is called upon to come before court on definite allegations, if any, made in the charge sheet. It is only at that stage that the petitioner can, if at all assail the final report if his case be that the averments in the final report do not make out the offence alleged. That stage is yet to be reached. This Court will not quash the FIR and stay the investigation of a cognizable offence, except for compelling reasons. There are no compelling reasons in this case. Hence, without making any observation on the merits of the case, this Crl.M.C is dismissed, leaving the petitioner to his remedies in law at the appropriate stage. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj