IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 506 of 2007(C)
1. VIVEK SHIL AHUJA, AGED 47,
... Petitioner
2. V.BABU, AGED 42,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF
... Respondent
2. P.J.JOHNSON, AGED 36,
For Petitioner :SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :21/03/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO. 506 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of March, 2007
ORDER
The petitioners have come to this Court with the prayer
that an F.I.R. registered against him i.e., Crime No.223/06 of
the Nadakkavu Police Station, may be quashed. The said
crime has been registered on the basis of a private complaint
filed by one of the employees of the petitioners. The
complaint was referred to the police under Sec.156(3) of the
Cr.P.C. Investigation is in progress.
2. There can be no dispute on the question of law. The
powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. takes within its sweep,
the powers to quash an F.I.R. which is registered by the police
also. The width, sweep and amplitude of the powers must
bring with it the need for circumspection. I shall not
encumber the records with any unnecessary detailed
discussion on merits. Suffice it to say that I am satisfied that
the ideal course which can be followed by the court in the
circumstances of this case is to permit the Investigator to
CRL.M.C.NO. 506 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
complete the investigation and file the final report. The
petitioners’ option to seek further relief in case such final report
is against them shall remain unfettered. I am, in these
circumstances, satisfied that the relief claimed – quashing of the
F.I.R. cannot and need not be granted invoking the powers under
Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. However, I am satisfied that the
petitioners, who are persons not residing within the State,
deserve to be granted protection against any unnecessary and
vexatious arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that an anticipatory bail has already been granted in
favour of the petitioners by the learned Sessions Judge. The
petitioners, after indulgent extension of the time granted, were
permitted to surrender before the learned Magistrate on or
before 24/2/2007. But they have not been able to so surrender
on account of reasons beyond their control. The learned
counsel for the petitioners finally prays that, in the interests of
justice, the time granted under Annexures-A9 and A10 orders to
appear before the learned Magistrate may be extended and the
petitioners may be granted time till 2/4/2007 to appear before
the learned Magistrate as directed in Annexures-A9 and A10
orders i.e., orders dated 18/1/07 in Crl.M.C.No.45/07 and
CRL.M.C.NO. 506 OF 2007 -: 3 :-
Crl.M.P.No.282/07 dated 14/2/2007 both by the learned Sessions
Judge, Kozhikode. I am satisfied that though the said relief is not
specifically prayed for in the petition, the said lesser relief can
be granted in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.
3. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but the
petitioners are granted time till 2/4/2007 to comply with
Annexures-A9 and A10 orders.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
