IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1522 of 2006()
1. PREMANANDAN @ PREMAN, AGED 45,
... Petitioner
2. NAJEEB, S/O. KOCHUMUHAMMED, AGED 34,
3. LAXMANAN, S/O. VELU, AGED 60,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.D.JOHNY
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :31/03/2009
O R D E R
M.C.HARI RANI, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.No.1522 OF 2006
--------------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF MARCH, 2009
O R D E R
The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.83/2006
of Thrikkakara Police Station and this petition is filed under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash Annexure-A1 FIR
and all further proceedings in the above crime on the file of
J.F.C.Ms’. Court-I, Aluva.
2. When this petition came up for hearing, no
representation is made on behalf of petitioners 1 to 3. Counsel
also absent. I have perused the allegations in this petition and
the documents produced by the petitioners. Heard the learned
Public Prosecutor, appearing for the first respondent. The Area
Manager, Airtel Company, was impleaded subsequently as
additional 2nd respondent as directed by this Court as per order
dated 5.6.2006. Though service is complete on the 2nd
respondent, nobody has appeared, representing the 2nd
respondent.
3. Crime No.83/2006 of Thrikkakara Police Station was
CRL.M.C.No.1522/06 -2-
registered against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offences under sections
379 and 411 read with section 34 of IPC. 80 Kgs of copper cables
belonging to the Airtel Company-the 2nd respondent was found as
being transported by the first petitioner under suspicious
circumstances and petitioners 2 and 3 were implicated as accused
Nos.2 and 3 respectively for having purchased 42.5 Kgs of stolen
copper cables from the first accused from out of 80 Kgs of copper
cables, which was seized by the police. It is alleged in this petition
that the first petitioner is an employee of the Airtel Company-the 2nd
accused, and the coper cables were useless for the company and
therefore, he was taking it with the permission of the Company for
being sold it to hawkers.
4. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that
investigation of the above crime is completed and final report is filed
on 5.4.2006 before the Court of J.F.C.M.-I, Aluva and is pending before
that court as C.C.No.162/2007. Whether the petitioners have
committed the offence under sections 379 and 411 read with Section
34 of IPC as alleged is to be decided by the learned Magistrate after
trial and on the basis of the evidence to be adduced by the prosecution
and considering the defence evidence, if any. This Court cannot jump
CRL.M.C.No.1522/06 -3-
into a conclusion that the petitioners are innocent. Considering the
facts and circumstances of this case, I find that there is no sufficient
reason to exercise the inherent jurisdiction of this Court as envisaged
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., which can be exercised only sparingly
and with caution. Therefore, this petition is devoid of merits and is
liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn
