IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4967 of 2008 --------------------------------- ( C.C. NO. 57/2008 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM) .......... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- SANGEETHA BOSE, 10-D LINK HEIGHTS, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER PETER. RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- 1. S.I. OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZER. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4967 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under the provisions of the Copyright Act. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted after due investigation. She has entered appearance through counsel before the learned Magistrate. 2. The petitioner has come to this court now with a prayer that the prosecution launched against her may be quashed invoking the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. According to her, the allegations against her are groundless and she does not deserve to stand the trauma of a protracted trial. 3. An indictee facing undeserved criminal prosecution against her can certainly claim premature termination of such proceedings under law. Normally and ordinarily such premature termination can be claimed by invoking the ordinary provisions of the Code. In an appropriate case where the interests of justice Crl.M.C.No. 4967 of 2008 2 compellingly demand such course, this Court does of course have the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prematurely terminate such proceedings. But such invocation of the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction cannot be done as a matter of course. Sufficient, satisfactory, compelling and exceptional reasons must be shown to exist justifying the invocation of the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In all other cases parties need only be relegated to claim premature termination by discharge. In a warrant offence in which cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police, such premature termination can be claimed by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. This, I am satisfied, is a fit case where the petitioner must be relegated to seek premature termination by resort to the provisions of Section 239 Cr.P.C. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that unnecessary hardship and inconvenience will result if personal presence of the petitioner, a woman, were to be insisted till the plea of discharge is considered under Section 239 Cr.P.C. I am satisfied that appropriate directions can be issued. Crl.M.C.No. 4967 of 2008 3 5. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed without any fetter on the right of the petitioner to claim discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. It is further directed that until the plea of discharge is considered and a decision taken, personal presence of the petitioner shall not be insisted, if she is represented by a counsel. 6. Hand over the order. (R. BASANT) Judge tm