IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2009 / 12TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2317 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CRIME NO.303/2008 OF SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION. CC.506/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT,OTTAPPALAM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------------- RAGHUNANDANAN, S/O. JANARDHANAN ('SARANG', KULUKKILIYAD AMSOM DESOM, OTTAPPALAM TALUK), MANAGING DIRECTOR, OTTAPPALAM TALUK RUBBER MARKETING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.NO.P 1027, KOTTAPPURAM, SREEKRISHNAPURAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.WILSON URMESE MR.KURIAKOSE G.THEKKEL RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. VARGHESE JOHN, JOHNS VILLA, KOTTAPPURAM AMSOM DESOM, OTTAPALAM, REPRESENTED BY HIS AGENT V.V.SUKUMARAN BINDU NIVAS, KOTTAPPURAM PO, OTTAPPALAM TALUK. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P. RAVEENDRA BABU. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2009, ALONG WITH CRMC NO. 2326 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO. 2317/09 & 2326/09 ------------------------------------------------ Dated 3rd August 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in C.C.505/2009 and 506/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ottappalam. These petitions are filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that ingredients of the offence is not made out and no sanction was obtained for prosecuting the petitioner either as provided under Section 197 of Code of Criminal Procedure or under Section 95 of Co-operative Societies Act. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for petitioner, I find it not just or necessary for this counsel to exercise the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the complaint. When petitioner can very well seek an order of discharge from the concerned Magistrate as declared by the Apex CRMC 2317 & 2326/09 2 court Madhu Limaye Vs. State of Maharashtra (1977 (4) SCC 551) the inherent power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is not to be invoked when the redress of the grievance could be redressed from the trial court itself. Petitioner is entitled to file an application for discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions raised in this petition therein and seek an order of discharge. With that liberty petitions are disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.