Prasanna Chandran Nair vs State Of Kerala on 9 July, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2462 of 2010()


1. PRASANNA CHANDRAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. PRATAP KRISHNAN @ KANNAN,
3. RAJAMMA, W/O.PRASANNA CHANDRAN NAIR,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. NARAYANANKUTTY KARTHA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :09/07/2010

 O R D E R
                      V.RAMKUMAR, J.
                -------------------------------------
                 Crl.M.C.No.2462 of 2010
               ---------------------------------------
            Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010

                             ORDER

The petitioners who are the accused in CC.No.863/2009

on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I,

Cherthala which is a private complaint filed by the second

respondent herein alleging an offence punishable under

Section 379 read with Section 34 I.P.C. with regard to five

trees allegedly cut and removed by the petitioners, seek to

quash the proceedings against them. One of the contentions

raised by the petitioners is that since the petitioners were

residing beyond the territorial limits of the Magistrate, in the

light of the amended provisions under Section 202 Code of

Criminal Procedure the Magistrate was bound to conduct an

enquiry under Section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure and no

enquiry has been conducted.

2. A report from the Magistrate was called for by this

Court. As per report dated 7/7/2010 the Magistrate has

reported that after conducting an enquiry under Section 202

Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was taken on file. So

Crl.M.C.No.2462/2010
: 2 :

the said contention of the petitioners is unsustainable.

3. The Magistrate having taken cognizance of the

offence, the proper course open to the petitioners is to plead

for a discharge under Section 245 Cr.P.C at the appropriate

stage. I am inclined to permit the petitioners to plead for a

discharge in absentia. Accordingly the petitioners will be

entitled to plead for a discharge through their counsel and the

learned Magistrate shall not insist on the personal appearance

of the petitioners at the stage of 245 Code of Criminal

Procedure. The petitioners will be entitled to raise all

contentions available to them in law before the Magistrate.

This Criminal M.C. is disposed of as above.

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

skj