IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3965 of 2010() ------------------------------------ CC.797/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VAIKOM CRIME NO.722/2008 OF VAIKKOM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED --------------------------------------- BHUVANESWARY, AGED 42 , W/O.SADANANDHAN,PALAZHI NIVAS, NADUVILEMURIYIL, KIZHAKUMCHERY, VAIKKOM TALUK KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.RAVI K.PARIYARATH RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WADAKKANCHRY POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM.31. 2. M.P.MURALIDHARAN, S/O.BHASKARAM PANICKER JYOTHIS, NADUVILEMURIYIL ,KIZHAKUMCHERY, VAIKKOM, TALUK KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.686 141. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3965 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 28th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the accused in C.C.797/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vaikom taken cognizance for the offence under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-III report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Vaikom Police Station, filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that it is only a civil dispute and suit in between the petitioner and second respondent, de facto complainant is pending before the civil Court in respect of the agreement for sale and therefore, continuation of the proceedings is only an abuse of process of the Court. Crmc 3965/10 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find it necessary to quash the proceedings as sought for as 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. Only grievance could be that, for that purpose petitioner may have to appear before the learned Magistrate. But that could be avoided by permitting the petitioner to file an application under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is disposed granting liberty to the petitioner to seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure Crmc 3965/10 3 raising all the contentions raised herein. If a petition under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure is filed, learned Magistrate not to insist for the presence of the petitioner, for the purpose of claiming an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.