IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 5008 of 2008()
1. NAWAB,S/O.LATHEEF, KIZHAKKEVELIKKAKATH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUVA,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC
3. PAREEKUTTY, S/O.BAVA, CHAMAKKUDY HOUSE,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :05/01/2009
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 5008 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009
O R D E R
The petitioner is shown as an accused in a crime registered
alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 406 and
420 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner, along
with the co-accused, approached the defacto complainant and
induced him to enter into an agreement with fraudulent and
malafide intention. It was allegedly represented that the
transaction was for the benefit of the petitioner, but the document
need be made out in the name of the second accused. Agreement
was entered into between the defacto complainant and the second
accused. Fraudulent act of deception were performed. It is, in
these circumstances, that the private complaint was filed by the
defacto complainant alleging commission of offence by both the
accused in furtherance of their common intention. The complaint
was referred to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehending arrest
had moved the bail Bench of this Court for anticipatory bail.
Crl.M.C.No. 5008 of 2008
2
That application stands rejected. It is at that juncture that the petitioner
has come before this Court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
to quash the F.I.R. in so far as it relates to him.
2. I shall scrupulously avoid any detailed discussion about the
acceptability of the allegations or the credibility of the data collected.
Suffice it to say that I am not persuaded to agree at all that the extra
ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can or ought
to be invoked to quash the F.I.R. in so far as it relates to the petitioner.
It is for the petitioner now either to challenge the order refusing
anticipatory bail or to appear before the learned Magistrate or the
Investigating Officer and then seek regular bail.
3. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed. But I may hasten to observe
that the dismissal of this petition will not in any way fetter the rights of
the petitioner to raise all appropriate contentions before the learned
Magistrate at the stage of bail and thereafter.
4. Hand over the order.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm