IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2011 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 760 of 2011() ------------------- CC.327/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ................. PETITIONER / ACCUSED : ------------------------------------- ROHIT J., S/O.LATE V.G. RAJENDRAN NAIR, GRA.246-KOTTRA LANE, GOWREESAPATTOM, PATTOM P.O., TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS / STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEROORKADA POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031. 2. K.P.PRADEEP KUMAR, DIRECTOR, CENTER WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, 4/265, KRISHNA VIHAR, SANTHI LANE, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 101. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAIBY PAUL THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.760 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 10th day of March, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.327 of 2009 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thiruvananthapuram and Crime No.5 of 2008 of Peroorkada Police Station for offence punishable under Sec.419 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered on a complaint sent by post to the Sub Inspector by the second respondent. Second respondent stated that petitioner, impersonating himself as son of a then Member of the Parliament collected `.1,50,000/- from the second respondent promising to secure seat in a medical college at Mangalapuram for M.B.B.S course. Second respondent stated that he paid `.50,000/- in cash and `.1,00,000/- was paid through a friend of his at Chennai by way of cheque. Petitioner seeks to quash proceeding against him contending that there are no materials produced to connect him with the alleged incident. Learned counsel contended that even the date of alleged incident, for whom the M.B.B.S seat was intended to be procured and further details are not stated. It is also contended that police has not conducted any investigation whether any amount was drawn Crl.M.C.No.760 of 2011 -: 2 :- through cheque as pleaded by second respondent. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. Annexure-A is the copy of the complaint preferred by the second respondent. There, the date of payment of `.50,000/- is stated to be during January (of the year of complaint). He stated that `.50,000/- was paid to the petitioner and that `.1,00,000/- was paid through a friend of his at Chennai by way of cheque. 3. The case was registered in the year 2008 and Annexure-B, final report was submitted in the year 2009. Learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on 18.11.2009. There is no challenge to the final report for the last two years. Even when charge was framed against petitioner, that was not challenged. Now he case is ripe for trial. At this stage there is no reason for this Court to interfere under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner can urge his defences before the trial court. This criminal miscellaneous case is dismissed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-