IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2010 / 3RD ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1029 of 2010() ---------------------------------------- C.C.NO.1024/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE JFCM-III, PUNALUR PETITIONER(S): ---------------------------- # 1. TIBU C.THARAKAN, AGED 27, S/O.THOMAS THARAKAN, RESIDING AT E1-SHALOOM, NEAR PEEDIKAYIL JUNCTION, NARICKAL, CHAKKUVAREKKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. JOHN THARAKAN, AGED 57, S/O.CHERIYAN, PEEDIKAYIL VEEDU, NEAR PEEDIKAYIL JUNCTION, CHAKKUVARAKKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR # 1ST PETITIONER IS DELETED FROM PARTY ARRAY AS PER ORDER DATED 9.6.2010 IN CRL.M.A.NO.3110/2010 RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUNALUR POLICE STATION. 3. ROY, AGED 37, S/O.SIMON, KOILAPPALLIL VEEDU, KUTHIACHIRA MURI, PUNALUR VILLAGE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWICK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C..No.1029 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated: 24.06.2010 ORDER The 1st petitioner is deleted from the party array as per order dated 9.6.2010 in Crl.M.A.No.3110/2010. 2nd Petitioner, who is the accused in Crime No.361/2007 of Punalur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341,506(i) and 427 read with 44 IPC, seeks to quash Annexures A & B and further proceedings in C.C.No.1024/2007 on the file of the J.F.C.M-III, Punalur. 2. It is too early for this Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to meticulously scan the voluminous prosecution records and hold that the prosecution of the petitioner is groundless and the same is liable to be quashed. The appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to plead for a discharge before the Court below. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to plead for a discharge in absentia. Accordingly if the petitioner files an application for discharge before the court below through his counsel, that court shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioner for the disposal of the discharge petition. This Crl.M.C is disposed of reserving the above right of the petitioner. Dated this the 24th day of June, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj