IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 17TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1549 of 2010(E) ------------------------------- (CC.189/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, TRIVANDRUM, CRIME NO.276/2009 OF KARAMANA POLICE STATION ) .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 9, 17 & 18 ------------------------------------------- 1. SHYJU THANKACHAN, S/O.K.A.THANKACHAN, T.C.4/2239/22, KAWDIAR (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ANILKUMAR.G, S/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, SANIHAS, T.V.STATION ROAD, PEROORKADA (P.O), KAWDIAR (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. M.MAHESH, S/O.S.K.MANOHARAN, T.C.3/134, K.N.P. SADAN, PATTOM (P.O), PARUTHIPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. BY ADVS. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.RAJAN VELLOTH SRI.A.S.SABU SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1549 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are accused 9, 17 and 18 in C.C.No. 189/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Act and Section 4 of Human Trafficking Act on Annexure-II final report. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken as against the petitioners. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel is that the case was originally registered against the sixth charge witness and others and only later, finding that a lease deed was executed by the sixth charge witness in favour of the petitioners, where under they were permitted to run the lodge, they were implicated as the accused and the materials furnished along with the final report do not constitute any of the ingredients of the offences CRMC 1549/10 2 alleged against the petitioners and therefore, the case is to be quashed. Learned counsel also argued that none of the witnesses had spoken against the petitioners or that offences were committed with the knowledge or consent of the petitioners and only CW6 had mentioned the names of the petitioners and that too with regard to the lease alone and in such circumstances, the case against the petitioners is to be quashed. 4. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find it necessary for this court to exercise the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings as sought for, when petitioners are at liberty to raise all the contentions raised herein and seek an order of discharge from the concerned Magistrate. Petition is disposed granting liberty to the petitioners to raise all the contentions raised herein and seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 8th September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv