IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3508 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CC.311/2009 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II,MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4 -------------------------------------------------- 1. SANKARAPILLAI, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, KUZHIVELIL KALEEKKAL (H), KIZHAKMURI, THAMARAKULAM, MAVELIKARA. 2. CHANDRASEKHARANPILLAI P.K., PUTHIYAVEETTIL, VETIYAR MURI, VETIYAR VILLAGE. 3. GOPALAKRISHNAPILLAI, S/O.MADHAVA PILLAI, OTTATHENGIL HOUSE, PAYYANELOOR MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE. 4. KESAVANKUTY, S/O.KUNJUPILLAI, PARAPURATH (H),MEKKUMMURI, THAMARAKULAM, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. MR.C.HARIKUMAR SMT.MOLLY KOSHY RESPONDENT/STATE ------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO. 3508 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 17th November 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are accused in C.C.311/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikkara taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 465, 460 and 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the final report and the cognizance taken contending that as the allegation is that forgery is committed in a document produced in court, without complying with the procedure provided under Section 340 and clause (b) of Sub Section 1 of Section 195 of Code of Criminal Procedure, learned Magistrate should not have taken cognizance of the offences. 2. There is no case for the prosecution that any forgery or manipulation was committed to any of the document produced in court, while the documents are in the custody of the court. Then only the procedure provided under Section 340 of Crmc 3508/09 2 Code of Criminal Procedure is to be complied with or cognizance could be taken by following the procedure as provided under Section 195(1)(b) of Code of Criminal Procedure. When the case is that forgery was committed outside the court and then produced before the court, these formalities are not to be complied with. Hence on that ground the cognizance taken cannot be quashed. Learned counsel then submitted that petitioner may be permitted to seek an order of discharge from the learned Magistrate. Petitioner is at liberty to seek an order of discharge as provided under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel also submitted that petitioner may be exempted from personal appearance. It is for the petitioner to approach the Magistrate under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.