IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 685 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 950/2007 of KONDOTTY POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED 2: ----------------------------- V.RAMESH, MANAGER, ING VYSYA BANK, IST FLOOR, 'SHEMA', BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENTS: DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. KUTTANKAVIL HAMZA, S/O.MUHAMMED HAJI, AGED 31 YEARS, KUTTAN KAVIL HOUSE, KONDOTTY P.O., KONDOTTY. 2. MAMMUDU PANTHAKKAN, S/O.MOIDEEN KUTTY, AGED 27, PANTHAKKAN HOUSE, EDARIKODE P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, KONDOTTY. BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== CRL.M.C. No. 685 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 28th day of February, 2008. O R D E R The petitioner, who is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 950 of 2007 of Kondotty Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 477 r/w Section 34 IPC, seeks to quash Annexure A1 F.I.R and Annexure A2 complaint. According to the petitioner, in the light of the decision reported in Ashok Kumar vs. Balaraman (1998(1) KLT 155), no case can be registered against the petitioner. 2. I am not inclined to quash the FIR and to stay the investigation, in the facts and circumstances of this case. Technically, there is no case pending before the inferior court for this Court to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Moreover, the case is still in the crime stage and the petitioner can feel aggrieved only if the police after investigation file a final report before the court and the court takes cognizance of the offence. In case the petitioner is aggrieved at that stage, he can approach the appropriate court for redressal of his grievances. Reserving this right of the petitioner, this Crl.M.C is dismissed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv