IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 523 of 2008() ------------------------------ ST.429/2005 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.C.ASOKA KUMAR, S/O.SRI.C.K.CHELLAPPA SASTHRI, SREE DHANYAM, MULAVANA P.O., TVM, R/AT 39 MELBOURNE ROAD, LONDON E62RU, UNITED KINGDOM, REP. BY HIS DULY AUTHORISED POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K.C.SASIKUMAR, AGED 59, S/O.SRI.CHELLAPPA SASTRI, R/AT SILA BY ADVS. SRI.S.V.RAJAN SRI.S.ARUN RAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. T.M.VIDYADHARAN, SOMASANTHAM, TC 6/1758 PTP NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. S.SASIDHARAN, CHEKKADASSERI HOUSE, TC 45/76, THOTTAM, MANACUAD P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-31. R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.523 of 2008 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2011 Order The second accused in S.T.No.467 of 2006 on the file of JFCM Court-III, Trivandrum is the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner is that he was arrayed as the second accused in that case for the sole reason that the cheque was drawn on a joint account of the petitioner and the first accused in the aforesaid case. Admittedly, the cheque was not signed or drawn by the petitioner and hence it is argued that no prosecution under Section 138 can be had against the petitioner. The complainant- first respondent is absent. There was no case for the complainant that the cheque in question was drawn by the petitioner herein. For the sole reason that the account stands jointly in the name of the petitioner and the first accused in the S.T case, it cannot be said that a successful prosecution can be had against the petitioner herein under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. In view of the fact that the cheque was not drawn by the petitioner, the Crl.M.C.523/08 2 prosecution so far as it relates to the petitioner is quashed. The Crl. M.C is allowed. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd Crl.M.C.523/08 3