IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1112 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.218/2007 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------- 1. NIZAR.M.A, AGED 40 YEARS, SATHAR MANSIL, MOOVATTUPUZHA, NOW RESIDING AT KUMARANALLOOR, KOTTAYAM. 2. S.K.NITHEESH, SHASTHAMKUNNEL, BY ADV. SRI.V.S.AFSAL KHAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- 1. S.I. OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 3. SREERAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, ERNAKULAM BRANCH, NEAR KRISHNA HOSPITAL, CHITTOOR ROAD, ERNAKULAM. R1 & 2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 1112 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the prosecution initiated against him, inter alia, under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C. 2. The prayer is to quash the F.I.R. and all further proceedings taken in pursuance of the F.I.R. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Calender case has been registered. The petitioner has already entered appearance and has been enlarged on bail. 3. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am not persuaded to agree that there are any circumstances warranting the invocation of the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner now. The petitioner, who has already entered appearance before the learned Magistrate, must stake his claim for premature termination of the proceedings by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. The learned Crl.M.C.No. 1112 of 2008 2 Magistrate must consider such plea and pass appropriate orders of framing charge/discharge under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if personal appearance of the petitioner were insisted for such hearing under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. that would cause the petitioner very great hardship and loss. I am satisfied that there can be a direction to the learned Magistrate not to insist on the personal presence of the petitioner until a decision is taken on the question of charge/discharge under section 239/240 Cr.P.C. Till then the petitioner shall be permitted to appear through counsel and participate in the proceedings. 5. This Crl.M.C. Is dismissed, but subject to the specific observations/directions. (R. BASANT) Judge tm