IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2008 / 21ST SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2670 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.663/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, THRISSUR Cr.NO.780/2007 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED 1 TO 3. --------------------------- 1. K.K.WILSON, S/O.KOCHAKKAN, KAKKERY HOUSE, KANJIRATHODU,IRINJALAKUDA. 2. SIVASANKARAN, S/O.C.SANAKARANKUTTY NAIR, CHERUVARA HOUSE, MAKKATTUKARA,NETISSERY P.O., THRISSUR. 3. V.ANWAR, S/O.KHADER, VALIYAKATHU HOUSE, MC AVENUE, KUNNAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN (SR.) SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT. ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THIRSSUR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2670 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2008 ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 to 3 in a prosecution launched against them under Section 384 r/w 34 I.P.C. All the 3 petitioners are already on bail, it is submitted. It is alleged in the final report submitted by the police that the petitioners have committed the offence punishable under Section 384 r/w 34 I.P.C. According to the petitioners, the allegations are totally untenable and they do not deserve to endure the trauma of a criminal prosecution against them. They pray that the extraordinary inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked to quash the proceedings initiated against them. 2. An indictee who faces unjustified criminal prosecution can claim premature termination of proceedings under the ordinary provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. In a warrant trial initiated on the basis of the final report submitted by the police, such premature termination can be claimed by an indictee under Section 239 Cr.P.C. Of course, in an exceptional case where the facts of the case compellingly demand such a course in Crl.M.C. No.2670 of 2008 2 the interests of justice, powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked by this Court to bring to premature termination such prosecutions. But that cannot be a matter of course. Exceptional reasons must be shown to exist. The petitioners are already on bail, it is submitted. The petitioners can now appear before the learned Magistrate after cognizance is taken and claim premature termination of proceedings by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. On going through the facts of the case, I find that the petitioners do deserve an opportunity to claim discharge. If they claim discharge at the stage of 239 Cr.P.C, the learned Magistrate must consider such contention and come to appropriate conclusion. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that this Crl.M.C can be dismissed with appropriate observations and safeguards. 3. In the result: i) This Crl.M.C is dismissed; ii) But it is made clear that the dismissal of this petition will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioners to seek discharge under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C; iii) It is directed that the petitioners can now appear before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. After they Crl.M.C. No.2670 of 2008 3 are enlarged on bail, their personal presence need not be insisted until a decision is taken on the question of charge/discharge under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. Till then they shall be permitted to be represented by their counsel. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-