IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1007 of 2008()
1. T.P.PARAMESWARAN, AGED 55 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. P.K.GEETHA,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. PHARMA KURIES PVT. LTD., PUTHOOR BLDG.,
3. M/S. SREE POORNA ROLLER FLOOR MILLS (P)
4. T.P.VISWANATHAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.T.BALAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :10/11/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. Nos.1007, 1106, 1107, 1108, 1121
and 1126 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of November, 2008
ORDER
The common petitioners are accused 3 and 4 in 6
prosecutions all pending, under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act and initiated against them by the same
complainant. It is submitted that cognizance has been taken in
all these cases as early as in 2001. In 4 cases, trial has
commenced and the matter is pending at the stage of defence
evidence. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that an
application had been filed by the accused to forward the cheque
to the expert. That application was dismissed. The petitioners
had come to this Court. This Court had rejected the challenge
and it is at this fag end that these petitions have been filed by
the petitioners.
2. The crux of the prayer is to quash the proceedings
invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section
482 Cr.P.C on the short ground that sufficient averments are not
there to attract culpable liability under Section 138 r/w 141 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act as insisted by the S.M.S
Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla [2005(4) KLT 209
(S.C)].
Crl.M.C. Nos.1007, 1106, 1107, 1108, 1121
and 1126 of 2008 2
3. Notice was given. The respondent/claimant has
entered appearance. He opposes the application vehemently.
He submits that sufficient averments have been raised in para.3
of the complaint to the effect that the culpable act has been
committed with the knowledge, consent and connivance of the
petitioners herein. At any rate, considering the stage of the
proceedings and the sequence of events that have taken place in
this case this is not a fit case to invoke the extraordinary
inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C, submits the
learned counsel for the complainant.
4. Having considered all the relevant inputs including
the fact that the prosecution has been pending from 2001 and
that the trial has already commenced and has reached the stage
of defence evidence, I am satisfied that it is not necessary at this
stage to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
5. In the result:
i) These Crl.M.Cs are dismissed;
ii) The learned Magistrate shall ensure that these
prosecutions are disposed of in accordance with law as
expeditiously as possible.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-