IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 6TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 15TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2854 of 2010() ------------------------------------ CC.502/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, MUVATTUPUZHA CRIME NO.53/2008 OF KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER(S): 2ND ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------- SHAIJU PAULOSE, S/O.PAULOSE, AGED 27 YEARS, MANDAPATHIL HOUSE, KIZHAKOMBU KARA, KOOTHATTUKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.NIRMAL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBILC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MR.K.M.PAULOSE, S/O.MATHAI, AGED 53, KATUKUMMAKKU HOUSE, KIZHAKOMBU KARA, KOOTHATTUKULAM, 686 632 (DEFACTO COMPLAINANT WHO REPRESENTED SHEROLPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM,258(D)APEX, KIZHAKOMBU,KOOTHATTUKULAM). 3. GEORGE KURIAN, S/O.KURIAKOSE, AGED 50, KANDATHIL HOUSE, KOZHAKOMBU KARA, KOOTHATTUKULAM, (IST ACCUSED IN THE ABOVE NUMBERED CASE).686 632 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.2854 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 6th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the second accused in C.C.502/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Muvattupuzha, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 120 B, 403, 408, 420 and 465 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A2 final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Koothattukulam in Crime No.53/2003, registered on receiving Annexure-A1 complaint filed by the second respondent before the Magistrate and sent for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Crmc 2854/10 2 Procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that petitioner is only a casual labourer and no sanction was obtained from the Board to prosecute the petitioner and there is no material to prove the case as against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is still absconding and Annexure-A2 final report shows prima facie the offences alleged and therefore, there is no reason to quash the cognizance taken. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner may be permitted the raise the contentions raised herein before the learned Magistrate and his presence may not be insisted Crmc 2854/10 3 for the purpose of discharge. 4. On hearing the Learned counsel, I find no reason to exercise the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction of this court to quash the cognizance taken. Petitioner is at liberty to seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Magistrate, raising all the contentions raised herein. It is upto the petitioner to file an application under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure and if such an application is filed, it is for the learned Magistrate to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5. Learned counsel submitted that a direction may be issued to the Magistrate to consider the application for bail on the date of his surrender. When an accused surrenders Crmc 2854/10 4 and files an application for bail, Magistrate is expected to pass orders in the application without delay. I find no reason to believe that the Magistrate is unaware of the provisions of law or the decisions of this court or that the Magistrate will not act in accordance with law. Hence no direction is warranted. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.