IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2008 / 13TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2931 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 976 OF 2003, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, KOCHI CITY PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.3 ------------------------ A.KRISHNA SWAMI, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.ARUMUGHA MUTHALIYAR, CHAIRMAN DR.NAVALAR NEDUMCHEZHIYAN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,RAJANAGAR, VAIDHYANATHAPURAM, THOLUTHUR, KADALLUR DISTRICT, PIN-686 303, TAMIL NADU STATE. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROESCUTOR, HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 2931 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of August, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the third accused and he along with the co-accused faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation in a crime registered. That crime, in turn, was registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the defacto complainant before the learned Magistrate and referred to the police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. The petitioner has already been granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Calender case has been registered, it is submitted. The petitioner has in these circumstances come to this Court with a prayer that the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to prematurely terminate the proceedings against him. Crl.M.C.No. 2931 of 2008 2 2. The petitioner has raised various contentions. First of all it is contended that sufficient materials are not placed before court to justify the cognizance taken against him. It is further submitted that at any rate, even assuming that the establishment, of which he is the Chairman, has been guilty of some indiscretion, the petitioner is not shown to have any culpable responsibility for the same at all. At worst the defacto complainant can only have a civil claim against the institution, of which the petitioner happens to be an office bearer. In these circumstances the petitioner does not deserve to stand the trauma of an unjustified prosecution. Premature termination of the proceedings may be brought about by the invocation of the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., submits the counsel. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. At this early stage of the proceedings exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I shall carefully avoid any detailed discussion on merits about the acceptability of the allegations or the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Premature termination of an Crl.M.C.No. 2931 of 2008 3 unjustified criminal prosecution/indictment can be brought about by resort to the ordinary provisions of the Cr.P.C. Such premature termination in a prosecution launched on the basis of a final report submitted by the police can be brought about by claiming discharge under section 239 Cr.P.C. Of course, in an appropriate case, this Court has the power to bring about premature termination of the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. But that cannot be a matter of course. Satisfactory and exceptional reasons must be shown to exist to justify invocation of such jurisdiction. Normally and ordinarily such premature termination must be claimed under the ordinary provisions of the Cr.P.C. - Section 239 in the facts and circumstances of this case. 4. I am satisfied that this petition can in these circumstances be dismissed with the observation that the petitioner's right to claim premature termination by discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. shall remain unfettered by the dismissal of this petition. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already been granted anticipatory bail and if the personal presence of the petitioner were insisted to facilitate the hearing on the Crl.M.C.No. 2931 of 2008 4 question of discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C., that would cause very great hardship, inconvenience and loss to him. I am satisfied in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case that appropriate directions can be issued to obviate such alleged prejudice against the petitioner. 6. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed, subject to the above observations. There shall be a further direction that if the petitioner is represented by a counsel, personal presence of the petitioner shall not be insisted for hearing on the question of discharge at the stage of Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. Until a decision is taken on the question of discharge, the petitioner shall be permitted to appear through his counsel and advance his plea. 7. Hand over the order. (R. BASANT) Judge tm