IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 348 of 2011()
1. P.V.SURENDRAN, AGED 43 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. P.V.RAVEENDRAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN,
3. P.V.JAYAPRAKASH, S/O.VELAYUDHAN,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. M.A.JOHNY, AGED 43 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.RAJIT
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :04/02/2011
O R D E R
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
====================================
Crl. M.C. No.348 of 2011
====================================
Dated this the 04th day of February, 2011
O R D E R
Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C. No.476 of 2010 of
the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chavakkad for
offences punishable under 465, 468, 471 and 420 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that one
Murraleedharan subscribed to a Chitty in the name of his minor
daughter and later prized the same in the auction. Respondent
No.2 was a surety to that transaction and he signed the Kuri
agreement. Muraleedharan handed over certain blank cheques,
signed blank papers and blank stamp papers to respondent No.2.
It is the case of petitioners that the said documents were forged.
Learned counsel submitted that it is a case where the learned
Magistrate has taken cognizance merely on the sworn statement
of respondent No.2 and that even the alleged forged documents
are not produced before court. Learned counsel therefore argued
that it is a fit case where complaint and cognizance against
petitioners are to be quashed.
2. Petitioners have a remedy under Section 245(1) or (2)
of the Code of Criminal Procedure to plead discharge in the trial
CRL.M.C. No. 348 of 2011
-: 2 :-
court. In such a situation there is no reason why this Court should
interfere under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for
short, “the Code”).
3. Learned counsel requested that petitioners may be
permitted to plead for discharge appearing through counsel. That
is a matter which the learned Magistrate has to decide if
appropriate application stating reasons is filed before the learned
Magistrate. If any such application is preferred learned Magistrate
shall consider that application and pass appropriate orders as
circumstances warranted.
Resultantly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is closed
without prejudice to right of petitioners to plead discharge under
Section 245(1) or (2) of the Code.
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
vsv