IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2010 / 9TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 181 of 2010() ------------------------ CRIME NO.915 OF 2008 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- K.BALAN, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.LATE K.M.VELAYUDHAN, 'DEEPTHI', KURAMPALA VIA., PANDALAM P.O., 689 501, ADOOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBCID, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBCID, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. K.P.BIJUKUMAR, KIZHAKKEDATH VEEDU, VADAKKADATHUKAVU P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 5. SANTHOSH BABU, BABU VILASAM, NEDUMANKAVU P.O., KOODAL, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 6. VINOD BABU, BABU VILASAM, NEDUMANKAVU P.O., KOODAL, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 7. USHUS RAJ, 'LAVANYA', KARITHOTTA P.O., KIDANGOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 8. BABU SENAPANICKER, BABU VILASAM, NEDUMANKAVU P.O., KOODAL, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 9. SHEEBU KIZHAKKEDATH, KIZHAKKEDATH VEEDU, VADAKKEDATH P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 181 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2010. ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to have Annexure I FIR quashed or may direct respondents 1 to 3 to record composition and to drop the proceedings in Crime No.951 of 2008 of Adoor Police Station. 2. Petitioner is the defacto complainant in Crime No.951 of 2008. Respondents 4 to 10 are the accused therein. 3. Petitioner's sons Deepak and Rajesh were working in the City Emperor General Trading Company, of which the fifth respondent was the Managing Director. Respondents 6 to 10 are close relatives. It is alleged that respondents 4 to 10 obtained substantial loans from various financial institutions at Dubai obtaining signed blank papers from the children of the petitioners and also manipulating those documents. Under those Crl.M.C.181/2010. 2 circumstances, the petitioner preferred a representation before the Chief Minister. Consequently, Crime No.915 of 2008 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 468, 411, 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The copy of the FIR is produced as Annexure 1. Complaining of inadequate investigation, the petitioner approached this court by filing Crl.M.C. No.1233 of 2009. The case was then entrusted to the second respondent for investigation. Petitioner points out that in the meanwhile due to the intervention of mediators, the prosecution against the petitioner's children had been withdrawn. It was also agreed that the petitioner will take necessary steps to withdraw Crime No.951 of 2008 initiated by the petitioner. Petitioner has made a representation before the police to drop and compound the case. Copy of the representation is produced as Annexure 3. 4. Petitioner prays that the plea of compounding etc. may be allowed and proceedings may be quashed. Crl.M.C.181/2010. 3 5. On the very face of it, the petition is not maintainable. Petitioner could not have approached the police for compounding and drop the proceedings. Annexure 3 representation does not contain the signature of the petitioner. Even otherwise, the prayer either to drop or compound the case cannot be entertained. Accordingly, this petition is without merits and it is dismissed. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.