IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2010 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4523 of 2010() ------------------------------------ CC. NO.506/2010 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE -I, PERINTHALMANNA. ......... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 2 TO 7 ------------------------------------------------ 1. SUHARA, D/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, THEVARTHODI HOUSE, KADANNAMANNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. 2. SAINABA, W/O.LATE RAYIN, MP 10/679, THONDIPULAN HOUSE, MANKADA P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. 3. KUNHALI, S/O.LATE RAYIN, MP 10/750 B, THONDIPULAN HOUSE, MANKADA P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. 4. SALIMA, W/O.KUNHALI, THONDIPULAN HOUSE, MANKADA P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. 5. KUTTAYI, S/O.LATE RAYIN, MP 10/749, THONDIPULAN HOUSE, MANKADA P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. 6. MUSTHAFFA, S/O.LATE RAYIN, MP 10/679 A, THONDIPULAN HOUSE, MANKADA P.O., MALAPPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY RESPONDENT(S): DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. KHADEEJA, D/O.MUHAMMED, PILATHODAN HOUSE, KARKIDAKAM, MANKADA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4523 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are accused 2 to 7 in C.C.No. 506/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Perinthalmanna, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 406 and 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-8 final report. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, I do not find that on the materials produced, by appreciating the evidence, the case is to be quashed, exercising the inherent power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel then submitted that CRMC 4523/10 2 petitioners may be permitted to seek discharge before the learned Magistrate and presence of the petitioners may not be insisted for that purpose. Petition is disposed granting liberty to the petitioners to seek an order of discharge before the learned Magistrate, raising all the contentions raised herein. If petitioners file petitions under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure to dispense with their presence, learned Magistrate shall not insist for their presence to claim an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 8th December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv