High Court Kerala High Court

Marykutty Joseph vs K.M.James on 12 October, 2010

Kerala High Court
Marykutty Joseph vs K.M.James on 12 October, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3922 of 2010()


1. MARYKUTTY JOSEPH,W/O.JOSEPH,AGED 50
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. K.M.JAMES,S/O.MICHAEL,AGED 46 YEARS,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

                For Petitioner  :SRI.CIBI THOMAS

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :12/10/2010

 O R D E R
          M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

           ---------------------------------------------
             CRL.M.C.NO.3922 OF 2010
           ---------------------------------------------
           Dated         12th October, 2010


                          O R D E R

Petitioner, the accused in

S.T.418/2006 on the file of Judicial First

Class Magistrate’s Court, Mattannur filed

this petition under Section 482 of Code of

Criminal Procedure, to quash Annexure-V

order passed by the learned Magistrate in

C.M.P.1013/2010 filed by the petitioner to

stay the proceedings till the disposal of

O.S.165/2006 and report of the expert is

received by the Civil Court.

2. Learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner and first respondent were

heard.

3. Learned Magistrate has taken

cognizance for the offence under Section

Crmc 3922/10
2

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. It is

submitted that evidence of the first respondent

was over and case stands posted for questioning

petitioner under Section 313 of Code of

Criminal Procedure. It is at that stage

C.M.P.1013/2010 was filed. It is also admitted

by both parties that original cheque which was

produced before the Court was called for by the

Principal Sub Judge, Thalassery in

O.S.165/2006, a suit instituted by the first

respondent for realisation of the amount from

the petitioner and on an application filed by

the petitioner herein in that suit, the cheque

was sent to an expert and report is awaited. I

find no reason to interfere with Annexure-V

order, as learned Magistrate was justified in

not staying the proceedings. But if the

original cheque is not available before the

Crmc 3922/10
3

learned Magistrate to compare the signature

seen therein with the admitted signatures,

learned Magistrate cannot dispose the case and

can only adjourn the case. In such

circumstances, the petition is dismissed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.