IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 397 of 2011() ---------------------------------- (CRIME NO.3/2010 OF VACB, EASTERN RANGE, KOTTAYAM) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------------------------- A.V.POULOSE,REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.3/2010 OF VACB,EASTERN RANGE,KOTTAYAM). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.397 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of February, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.3 of 2010 of VACB, Eastern Range, Kottayam. Case was registered against him and others for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c) and (d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short, “the PC Act”) and Sections 409 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that officials of the VACB conducted a surprise check in the office of petitioner on 03.06.2010 and found shortage of money in two of the counters. It is alleged that petitioner as the Regional Transport Officer connived with accused Nos.1 and 2 and allowed them to remit the amount (allegedly) misappropriated even after detection of the offence on 03.06.2010 to the knowledge of petitioner(to make it appear that there was no such shortage). Petitioner has sought to quash the FIR against him on the ground that there is no material to show his involvement in the alleged incident or to show that he has in any way connived with accused Nos.1 and 2 in the commission of offences alleged. Learned counsel after arguing the matter for some time has requested permission to withdraw this petition without prejudice to the right of petitioner to take appropriate defence at the appropriate stage. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. Crl.MC No.397/2011 2 2. I do not find reason to disallow the request made by learned counsel for petitioner. Resultantly this petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the right of petitioner to take appropriate defence at the appropriate stage before appropriate forum as provided under law. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks