C.Khalid vs Sulaiman Vayalath on 27 May, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2016 of 2008()


1. C.KHALID, S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SULAIMAN VAYALATH,S/O. POCKER HAJI
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :27/05/2008

 O R D E R
                                R.BASANT, J
                        ------------------------------------
                       Crl.M.C No.2016 of 2008
                        -------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 27th day of May, 2008

                                    ORDER

Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The prosecution is based

on a cheque allegedly issued by the petitioner for discharge of a

liability. Cognizance has already been taken. The matter is

pending before the learned Magistrate.

2. The petitioner has come to this Court with a prayer

that the proceedings initiated against him under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act may be directed to be stayed

pending disposal of O.S.162 of 2006 before the Sub Court,

Thalassery between the same parties in which the alleged liability

of the petitioner to pay amounts to the 1st respondent/defacto

complainant is in dispute. The counsel submits that the disposal

of the civil case is likely to take some time and if in the meantime

the criminal prosecution is disposed of, it will cause great

prejudice and hardship to the petitioner.

3. I am unable to agree with the learned counsel for the

petitioner. The mere pendency of a civil litigation cannot be held

Crl.M.C No.2016 of 2008 2

to be sufficient reason to stay the proceedings in a prosecution

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. All the

defences which the petitioner can raise in the civil case and the

prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act

can be raised in the criminal trial and I am of opinion that it is not

necessary to wait for final disposal of the civil case to commence

the trial in the prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act. I am not persuaded to agree that any

exceptional reasons exist in this case to invoke the extraordinary

inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

4. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-