High Court Kerala High Court

Dr.K.V.Bhavadas vs State Of Kerala on 9 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
Dr.K.V.Bhavadas vs State Of Kerala on 9 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1705 of 2008()


1. DR.K.V.BHAVADAS, S/O.P.N.S.ACHAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SIBY MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :09/06/2008

 O R D E R
                          V. RAMKUMAR, J.
                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                      Crl.R.P. No. 1705 of 2008
                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                          Dated: 9-06-2008

                                ORDER

The Revision Petition is the complainant in a prosecution under

Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 involving two

cheques altogether for a sum of Rs. 29,000/-. The complaint was

filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manjeri and registered as

C.M.P. No. 10819 of 2007. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, as

per the impugned order dated 13-3-2008 dismissed the complaint

mainly for the reason that there was no demand for the amount

covered by the dishonoured cheques and that if at all there was a

demand in the lawyer notice it was only for the amount under the

original transaction.

2. I am afraid that I cannot agree with the above view taken

by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate was taking a

hyper- technical view of the matter . After calling for the records I

perused the lawyer notice issued by the revision petitioner to the

accused under Sec. 138 Cr.P.C. The notice contains a specific demand

of the chque amounts after adverting to the factum of borrowal and

issuance of two cheques for an amount totalling to Rs. 29,000/-.

Crl.R.P. No. 1705 of 2008 -:2:-

3. The learned Magistrate was also wrong in dismissing the

complaint under Sec. 203 Cr.P.C. at the pre-cognizance stage. If

according to the Magistrate, the complaint and the supporting

documents produced along with the complaint did not make out the

offence alleged the only course open to the Magistrate was to reject

the complaint at that stage. Dismissal of a complaint under Sec. 203

can only be at the post cognizance stage. For that reason also the

impugned order is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside.

4. Since the dismissal of the complaint was before the

issuance of process to the accused, notice to the accused in this

Revision is dispensed with.

In the result, this Crl.R.P. is allowed and C.M.P. No. 10819 of

2007 shall stand restored to file before the Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Manjeri who shall take cognizance of the offence punishable under

Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Revision Petitioner

shall appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Manjeri on 27-6-

2008 without any further notice.

Transmit back the entire lower court records forthwith.

V. RAMKUMAR,
(JUDGE)

Crl.R.P. No. 1705 of 2008 -:3:-

ani.