High Court Kerala High Court

Usha Devadas vs Preethi on 31 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
Usha Devadas vs Preethi on 31 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3185 of 2006()


1. USHA DEVADAS, W/O.DEVADAS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. DEVADAS, S/O.PARUKKUTTY AMMA,

                        Vs



1. PREETHI, D/O.CHANDRALEKHA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

 Dated :31/10/2008

 O R D E R
                              A.K.BASHEER, J.
             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      CRL.M.C.No.3185 OF 2006
             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
             Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008

                                    O R D E R

petitioners, who have been arraigned as accused in Crime

No.104/2006 of Pattambi Police Station, have preferred this

petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

seeking to quash the above proceedings pending against them.

2. The above crime has been registered on the basis of

a complaint preferred by respondent No.1 herein alleging

commission of offences punishable under Sections 406,417 and

420 I.P.C read with Section 34 I.P.C. In fact, the above

complaint was forwarded by the Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Pattambi to the police for investigation under Section

156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3. The case of the defacto complainant, in a nut shell, is

that she and her mother who had been residing with accused

1 and 2 in their residence, wanted to purchase a residential

building of their own. Therefore, they handed over 15 fixed

deposit receipts standing in their name to the two accused

as instructed by them in order to purchase the building.

2
CRL.M.C.NO.3185/06

According to the defacto complainant, the fixed deposit

receipts were encashed by the accused and a residential

building worth Rs.4,80,000/= was purchased. But she alleged

that a sum of Rs.12 lakhs was still due from the accused.

They had also refused to hand over the title deed in respect of

the residential building purchased in the name of the defacto

complainant and her mother.

I do not propose to refer to the other averments in the

complaint at this stage. In my view, the present petition filed

by the petitioners is wholly premature. It is true that the police

has registered the above crime on the basis of the complaint

forwarded by the jurisdictional Magistrate. The petitioners

have a definite case that they are innocent of the charge

levelled against them. The investigating agency will

undoubtedly unearth the real state of affairs and petitioners

will be charge sheeted only if the investigating agency finds

their complicity in the crime. In that view of the matter, I

do not find any reason to entertain this petition.

Therefore, the Crl.M.C is closed.

A.K.BASHEER, (JUDGE)

3
CRL.M.C.NO.3185/06