IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2910 of 2008() ------------------------------ LP.104/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-IV, KOZHIKODE .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------- NADHIR, S/O. MOOSA HAJI, KUDUKIL HOUSE, RAROTH AMSOM, VEZHUPUR DESOM, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH CID, SIG-III, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. C.M. NAZER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. ========================== Crl.R.P. No. 2910 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 26th day of August, 2008. ORDER The petitioner, who is the accused in Crime No. 335 of 2004 of Nadakkavu Police Station, Kozhikode and now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Kozhikode as L.P. No. 104 of 2006 in C.P.No. 4 of 2006, challenges the cognizance taken by the Magistrate for offences punishable under Sections 489 B and 489 C of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows: On 13.08.2004, CW1 one Meenakumari along with her husband went to the Karaparamb branch of the South Malabar Gramin Bank to make a remittance of Rs.1,50,000/- in her S.B account. The whole money was paid in denominations of Rs.500/-. After entrusting the cash to the cashier of the bank, it was discovered that 25 currency notes of Rs.500/- denominations were counterfeit currency notes. The matter was reported to the Nadakkavu police who registered the above crime. When CRL.R.P. NO. 2910/2008 : 2: questioned, Meenakumari stated that the said currency notes were given to her and her husband by one Shri. Aravindakshan CW4, who in turn stated that he had given the money to Meenakumari from out of Rs.4 lakhs given to him by O.P Abu. The said Abu stated that on 13.08.2004 he had executed a sale deed with respect to the property owned by Meenakumari. Abu when interrogated, stated that the sum of Rs.4 lakhs given by him to Aravindakshan was part of Rs.5 lakhs given to him by one Shri. T.V. Basheer of Thalakulathoor. T.V. Basheer in his statement to the police stated that his neighbour Sri. Mansoor owed a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to his younger brother Sakaria and on 12.08.2004 the said Mansoor had handed over the said amount to him through Nadhir (the petitioner herein) and when he counted the money, he did not notice any irregularity in the currency notes. 3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that there is absolutely no evidence to indicate that the revision petitioner who at the relevant time was aged only 19 years, had any role to play in the interpolation of fake currency CRL.R.P. NO. 2910/2008 : 3: notes among the genuine currency notes. The counsel also submitted that in view of the case diary statement of the aforesaid persons, it was not at all possible for the investigating agency to array the revision petitioner as the sole accused in the case and the complicity, if any, is on the part of the aforesaid persons and that the only role which could be attributed to the petitioner is the carrying of the currency notes. From that alone, it cannot be inferred that he had anything to do with the counterfeiting of notes. 4. All that the Magistrate has done is to issue summons to the revision petitioner. He has every right to plead for a discharge if, according to him, the materials produced by the prosecution do not even, prima facie, make out a case against him. This Court sitting in revision will be loath to go into the entire gamut of the prosecution materials and come to a conclusion either way. Hence, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the appropriate court for discharge at the appropriate stage, this revision is dismissed. The petitioner may surrender before the learned Magistrate and file an application for CRL.R.P. NO. 2910/2008 : 4: regular bail. As and when such an application is filed within two weeks from today, the Magistrate shall consider the same on merits and dispose of the same preferably on the same day on which it is filed. Dated this the 26th day of August, 2008. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv CRL.R.P. NO. 2910/2008 : 5: