IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2009 / 1ST MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 301 of 2009 -------------------------------- ( CRIME NO. 63/07 OF VENMONY POLICE STATION) ............... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 2 AND 3: ------------------------------------------------- 1. DEVAKI AMMA, AGED 70 YEARS, W/O. CHANDRAN PILLAI, MADHU NIVAS, ERAM MURI, VENMONY VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. 2. MANIYAMMA, AGED 46, W/O. RAVEENDRAN NAIR, NADEPADEETTETHIL, CHERUMUKHAM, ERAM MURI, VENMONY VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR. RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 301 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of January, 2009 O R D E R The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w. 34 I.P.C. Altogether there are three accused persons. The first accused is the husband and petitioners herein are the mother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively of the defacto complainant. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The petitioners have not appeared before the learned Magistrate. They have not been served with any summons. They have come to know of the prosecution initiated against them. According to them the allegations are not sustainable at all. Belated allegations have been raised with the transparent intention of vexing and harassing them. The first accused is employed abroad. The only motive behind implication of the petitioners is to cause harassment. The first petitioner/A2 is aged 70 years. The Crl.M.C.No. 301 of 2009 2 petitioners do not deserve to stand the trauma of such a prosecution. Invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the prosecution against them may be quashed, it is prayed. 2. Copy of the final report is made available as Annex.I. I do not find any merit in the contention that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are liable to be invoked to prematurely terminate the proceedings. I shall not delve deeper into the facts, lest the observations may convey unintended messages. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the petitioners must be relegated to claim premature termination by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. Considering the age of the first petitioner and the fact that both petitioners are women, I am satisfied that appropriate safeguards can be insisted to ensure that the prosecution does not work out needless hardship and prejudice to them. Appropriate directions can be issued. 3. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed. But it is observed that the petitioners shall be at liberty to claim premature termination by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. and such request must be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits and in accordance with Crl.M.C.No. 301 of 2009 3 law expeditiously. It is further observed that till a decision is taken under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C., in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be a direction that the petitioners shall be permitted to appear through their counsel and if they so appear through counsel in accordance with law, their personal presence shall not be insisted by the learned Magistrate till a decision is taken under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that against the petitioners warrants of arrest have been issued by the learned Magistrate, though there were not served with any summons. There shall be a further direction that such warrants of arrest shall not be executed against the petitioners till 31.1.2009, on or before which date they must appear through counsel before the learned Magistrate. (R. BASANT) Judge tm