IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2009 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3373 of 2009() ------------------------------------ ST.5377/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-IV (MOBILE), TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------- BOSE VARGHESE, CHEMPAKASSERIL HOUSE,POTHANICAUD (P.O.), KOTHAMANGALAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE FILM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,CHALACHITHRA KALABHAVAN, VAZHUTHACAUD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT AND AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, MR.D.SATHEESH, S/O.DEVADAS. 2. STATE OF KERALA- REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No.3373 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 4th day of December,2009 ORDER This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash S.T.5377/2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV, Thiruvananthapuram taken cognizance for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner had earlier also filed Crl.M.C.4262/2005 before this court seeking the very same relief which was ultimately dismissed for non prosecution on 8.8.2008. This petition is filed again to quash the proceedings raising the very same contentions. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that the case before the learned Magistrate originally ended in acquittal under section 256(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure and this court set aside that order and directed the Magistrate to dispose the case afresh by Annexure J order in Crl.A.261/2009 and in such circumstance the petition may not be dismissed on the ground that earlier Crl.M.C was dismissed. 2. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find Crl.M.C.3373/2009 2 any reason to interfere with the cognizance taken at this stage, when petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate. As the offence alleged is only under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act even personal presence of the petitioner is not to be insisted for the purpose of trial, provided petitioner files an application under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In such circumstances, with liberty to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate, petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006