IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 27TH BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2730 of 2009(C) -------------------------------------- [CC.NO.200/2009 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, NEDUMANGAD] .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- NARASIMHAN NAIR, S/O.KOCHAPPI PILLA, KOMALAVILASAM HOUSE, KANIYARAMKODE, CHITTUVIDU MURI, THOLIKODU VILLAGE. BY ADVS. MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU, MR.P.M.RAFIQ. RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. OMANA, D/O.AMMUKKUTTY AMMA, VATTAPALLU THEKATHU VILAKATHU HOUSE, PANAKODE KANIYARAMKODE, CHITTUVIDU MURI, THOLIKODU VILLAGE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2730 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.200/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Nedumangadu, taken cognizance on Annexure-A final report, submitted after investigation, for the offence under Section 380 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A final report and the further proceedings contending that the property, from which the stolen articles were cut, belongs to the petitioner. Petitioner has produced Annexure-B settlement deed, Annexure-C order of temporary injunction passed by the Munsiff, Nedumangadu in O.S. No.198/2007, a suit instituted by the petitioner and Annexure-F tax receipt in support of his contentions. 2. On hearing the learned counsel, I find no reason to quash Annexure-A FIR, exercising the extraordinary inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, when petitioner is entitled to seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. The CRMC 2730/09 2 question whether the stolen articles were cut from the property of the petitioner as claimed by him or as alleged by the prosecution, is a matter for consideration by the learned Magistrate. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that presence of the petitioner may not be insisted for filing and hearing a petition under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Considering the nature of the offence, I find it not necessary that petitioner should be present before the court either for filing a petition under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure or for hearing the same. Learned Magistrate is to grant exemption to the petitioner from personal appearance on a petition filed by him for that purpose to enable the petitioner to file a petition under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions raised in this petition and seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure, this petition is disposed. 18th September, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv