IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 5017 of 2008 ---------------------------------- CC.369/2007 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHITTUR .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NOS 2 AND 3: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. RAHEEMA, W/O.LATE SULAIMAN, 23/398 (2), PUTHUNGODE, THIRUNELLAI, PALAKKAD 2. RINISA, W/O.KUNNIMUHAMMED, PUNYA, VALIYAPARAMB, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN. RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT/ STATE: -------------------------------------------------------- 1. SALINA, D/O.K.S.JAMAL MOIDEEN, KULAVEED, POLICE STREET, PUTHUNAGARAM, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I OF POLICE, PUTHUNAGARAM POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NO,127/2007. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.5017 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009 ORDER The petitioners are the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the de facto complainant and they, along with the husband of the de facto complainant, face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.498A read with Sec.34 IPC. Cognizance has been taken. The petitioners have already appeared before the learned Magistrate and have been enlarged on bail, it is submitted. The petitioners have now come to this Court at this juncture with this petition under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the prosecution against them. The allegations are totally incorrect, artificial and false. The petitioners do not deserve to stand the trauma of such a criminal trial. Proceedings against them may be prematurely terminated, it is prayed. Crl.M.C. No.5017 of 2009 -: 2 :- 2. An indictee facing unjustified criminal prosecution is certainly entitled to claim premature termination of proceedings. Usually, ordinarily and normally such premature termination must be claimed in accordance with the ordinary provisions of the Code. In a warrant offence in which cognizance has been taken on the basis of a police report, such premature termination can be claimed ordinarily under the Code by discharge under Sec.239 Cr.P.C. In an exceptional case where the interests of justice compellingly demand such course, this Court definitely has the reservoir of powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to act in aid of justice and bring such prosecution to premature termination. But invocation of the powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. cannot be a matter of course. Satisfactory, compelling and exceptional reasons must be shown to insist to justify invocation of such jurisdiction. 3. I shall not delve deeper into the facts. Suffice it to say that I am not persuaded to agree that any such compelling reasons exist in this case to justify the invocation of the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. This, I Crl.M.C. No.5017 of 2009 -: 3 :- am satisfied, is an eminently fit case where the petitioners must be relegated to claim premature termination by discharge under Sec.239 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are already on bail and, needless hardship and suffering will be endured by them if their personal presence were insisted on all dates of posting till the claim for discharge is considered on merits and decision taken. I agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners that while dismissing this Crl.M.C. appropriate observations can be made. 4. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with the specific observation that the petitioners' prayer for premature termination by discharge under Sec.239 Cr.P.C. shall be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits and appropriate decision taken as expeditiously as possible. (b) It is further observed that if the petitioners are already on bail, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, their personal presence need not be insisted until (and if) the learned Magistrate takes the view that the charges are liable to Crl.M.C. No.5017 of 2009 -: 4 :- be framed. Till then, they shall be permitted to appear through their counsel. 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Crl.M.C. No.5017 of 2009 -: 5 :-