IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 200 of 2007()
1. VIJAYA, W/O.SURENDRAN PILLAI,
... Petitioner
2. SURENDRAN PILLAI, AGED 50 YEARS,
Vs
1. JAYASREE, W/O.SASIDHARAN PILLAI,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC
For Petitioner :SRI.N.UNNIKRISHNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :24/01/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 200 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 24th day of January, 2007
O R D E R
The petitioners are accused in a prosecution under Sections
420, 468 r/w. 34 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of
the final report submitted by the police. Investigation commenced on
the basis of a private complaint filed by the respondent herein, which
was referred to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
2. It is of relevance to say that a prosecution has been initiated
by the second petitioner against the first respondent alleging
commission of the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. That
prosecution is also pending. The petitioners have appeared before the
learned Magistrate. The petitioners have come to this Court with this
petition with a prayer to quash the proceedings under Section 482
Cr.P.C.
3. What is the reason? The learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the allegations raised against the petitioners are false
and are only raised as a counterblast to the prosecution initiated under
Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The prosecution is vexatious.
Crl.M.C.No. 200 of 2007 2
Continuation of the prosecution amounts to negation of justice. In these
circumstances powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked, urges the
learned counsel. The dispute is essentially one of civil nature.
4. I am unable to accept the contentions. It cannot be contended on
the facts that the allegations, if accepted, would not amount to any offence.
Allegations and counter allegations appear to have been raised in respect of
the cheques in question in the S.138 prosecution and in the final report
submitted to court. I am of the opinion that the petitioners must raise these
contentions before the learned Magistrate at the appropriate stage and claim
discharge/acquittal in the prosecution initiated against them. I am not
satisfied that there are any such circumstance which would justify the
invocation of the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
5. This Crl.M.C. is hence dismissed. I may hasten to observe that I
have not intended to express any opinion on merits. It shall be open to the
petitioners to claim discharge/acquittal at the appropriate stage before the
learned Magistrate.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm
Crl.M.C.No. 200 of 2007 3