IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2095 of 2008() ------------------------- C.C.NO. 20/08 OF JFCM COURT, KALPETTA PETITIONER: 1 ------------- K.SREEDHARAN, 61 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN KURUPPANTHODIYIL, POST, KOLAMN, VAIDYAR MOOLA EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. VASANTHA KUMARI, CHELATH VEETTIL, KANIAMPATTA POST, VYTHIRI TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 2095 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Cognizance has already been taken. The petitioner has appeared before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner in that case wants to raise a defence that the cheque was not issued for the due discharge of any legally enforceable debt/liability, but was extracted out of him by intervention of a police officer at the instance of the complainant. The petitioner, it is submitted, has raised a complaint against such police officer before the superior officials. Since no action has been taken against the said officer, the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition before this Court and the same is pending as WPC 9955 of 2008. 2. The petitioner has now come before this Court with a prayer that the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the proceedings against him or in the alternative it is prayed at the bar that there may be a direction that further Crl.M.C.No. 2095 of 2008 2 proceedings may be kept in abeyance until the enquiry against the police officer is completed. 3. I find no merit in the prayer raised by the petitioner. There is no case that any crime has been committed by the said police officer or the complainant. No F.I.R. is registered. No private complaint has been filed before Court also. Merely because of the pendency of some departmental enquiry against a police officer, I am of the opinion that further proceedings in the 138 complaint need not be kept in abeyance nor need the complaint be quashed. The petitioner can raise his defence before the learned Magistrate in the trial and I find no merit whatsoever in the prayer that the complaint should be quashed or the proceedings in the complaint should be kept in abeyance until the enquiry is completed against the police officer. 4. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed. Needless to say that the dismissal of this Crl.M.C. will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to raise all appropriate contentions in the trial before the learned Magistrate. (R. BASANT) Judge tm