IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2008 / 25TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3896 of 2008() --------------------------------------- CC.571/1998 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT , KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ---------------------- K.M.MOHAMMED ABDUL RAHIMAN, S/O. ABDULLA, K.M.HOUSE, A.K.ROAD, P.O.EDNEER, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND STATE ----------------------- 1. M/S.KASARAGOD SELF EMPLOYEES FINANCING COMPANY(R), REP.BY GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SATHEESHAN K., RESIDING NEAR BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE CIRAMICS ROAS , THIRUVATH, KASARAGOD. 2. M/S.KASARAGOD ECO-INDUSTRIAL PARK AND TOURISM LTD., P.B. NO.76, VIKAS BHAVAN, MADUR ROAD, KASARAGOD, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE OFFICIAL RECEIVER APPOINTED BY THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. (a) M/S. KASARAGOD SELF EMPLOYEES FINANCING COMPANY LTD., P.B. NO. 76 , KASARAGOD. (b):- M/S. KASARAGOD ECO INDUSTRIAL PARK AND TOURISM LTD., P.B. NO.76, VIKAS BHAVAN, MADUR ROAD, KASARAGOD. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/10/2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 3896 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of October, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The prosecution is pending from 1998. Obviously, the matter has reached the stage of evidence now. Petitioner has now come to this Court with this petition to quash the proceedings invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In the alternative it is prayed that there may be a direction to adjourn the case so that in the mean time attempts can be made to settle the dispute. 2. Complainant is a company. A company petition, for winding up, is filed in respect of that company, it is submitted. It cannot be in any way affect the right of the company to prosecute the petitioner for the offences committed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Of course, the company will have to be properly represented. I have no reason to assume that the company would not have taken necessary steps to get itself represented properly for the conduct of the prosecution. It appears to be me that the petitioner is attempting only to protract Crl.M.C. No. 3896 OF 2008 -:2:- the proceedings which have been pending for the last one decade. I am not in these circumstances satisfied that this is a fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C can or ought to be invoked to quash the proceedings or even to direct the adjournment of the case to facilitate settlement. If the petitioner wants to settle the matter, he must do the same with the company. I am not persuaded in any view of the matter to agree that this petition deserves to be allowed. This Crl.M.C is accordingly dismissed. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb Crl.M.C. No. 3896 OF 2008 -:3:- Crl.M.C. No. 3896 OF 2008 -:4:-