IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1101 of 2008() ------------------------------------ CC.92/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): 2ND & 3RD ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------- 1. JESSY STANLEY, BEHIND CENTRAL EXCISE OFFICE, KAYAKUNNU, KANNUR-1. 2. GLADYS MENA, 'KRIPA', MUTTAD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER SMT.S.LAKSHMY RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & ACCUS3ED 1,4 & STATE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P. NATARAJAN, S/O.E.PERUMAL, 'SUVINA', THALIKKAVU, KANNUR. 2. WALTER SAHADEVI, C/O.MARIAM DELLO, D'NELLO COMPOUND, NEAR THOMAS NERONA COMPOUND, GORIGUDI, MANGALORE. 3. ABDUL SALAM, NEAR GOVERNMENT MTM SCHOOL, NARAYANA PARK,KANNUR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss CRMC. NO.1101/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A:- COPY OF THE REFER REPORT FILED B THE STATION HOUSE KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION. DTD. NIL. B:- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC. 92/2003 ON THE FILE OF JFCM – I, KANNUR DTD. 17.5.2004. C:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.MC. 3148/2004 DTD. 10.1.2008. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss N.K. BALAKRISHNAN,J. ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No. 1101 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011. O R D E R Petitioners are accused Nos. 2 and 3 in CC.92/2003 of JFCM – Kannur. The case was instituted on a private complaint alleging offences under Sections 420 and 120B IPC r/w 34IPC. The case against the first accused was already quashed by this court as per order No.3148/2004 stating that the complaint is ill conceived and mala fide. It can also be seen from para 4 of the order that if at all it would give rise to only a cause of action for filing a suit, the learned counsel submits. The complaint was filed by the broker stating that the brokerage received was less. In the light of what has been stated above, the continuation of the proceedings in CC.92/03 would be an abuse of cause. Hence this petition is allowed. Furthr proceedings in CC.92/03 of JFCM, Kannur is quashed. N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE smvd