Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2013 3RD SRAVANA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 3098 of 2013 () --------------------------- CC.3690/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHALAKUDY. ............ PETITIOENR/ACCUSED:- ----------------------------------- THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 4 YEARS, MANGINI HOUSE, CHALAKUDY P.O., CHALAKUDY. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.BABU. RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER:-: --------------------------------------------- 1. JACOB, S/O.DEVASSY, AGED 6 YEARS, VELIYATH HOUSE, ELINHIPRA DESOM, PARIYARAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. PIN-680 721.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI - 31. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S. HYMA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. Crl.MC.No. 3098 of 2013 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED AS CC.3690/2012 BEFORE J.F.M.C-I. ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY PETITION FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THRISSUR. ANNEXURE A3. TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE S.I. OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY. ANNEXURE A4. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT CC. 813/2011 DATED 23 08.2012. ANNEXURE A5. TRUE COPY OF THE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2281/2008. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. rs. V.K.MOHANAN, J.
------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.3098 of 2013 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of July, 2013 ORDER The petitioner is an accused facing prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act upon a complaint preferred by the first respondent herein. According to the petitioner, in view of Annexure-A3 and A4 the entire dispute and claim of the respondent are settled and therefore, no liability is due from the petitioner towards the complainant. Hence, it is prayed that, to quash all proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 and pending against the petitioner in C.C.No.3690 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and I have perused the materials produced along with this Crl.M.C.
3. The case of the petitioner is that, as evident from Annexure-A3 and A4, all dues from the petitioner to the complainant/the first respondent herein are settled and therefore the proceedings initiated in the court below upon Crl.M.C.No.3098 of 2013 :-2-: Annexure-A1 is an abuse of process of court. I am unable to sustain the above contention. In a proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. when the challenge is against the complaint, i.e., Annexure-A1, this Court is expected to consider whether the facts and circumstances alleged and contained in the complaint disclose any offence as alleged. If no offence is disclosed, as there is no sufficient pleading, this Court will be justified in interfering with the proceedings of the court below. But, in the present case the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the documents produced along with this Crl.M.C. show that no liability is due to the complainant in Annexure-A1. According to me, the proper forum to raise such a contention is the trial court, where the complaint is pending and it is for that court to see whether the cheque in question in that case was issued towards the discharge of any liability and whether any liability was due to the complainant from the petitioner at the time of the alleged issuance of the cheque. However this Court will not be justified in conducting an enquiry in this regard which is within the ambit of trial court, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No.3098 of 2013 :-3-: In the result, there is no merit in this Crl.M.C. and accordingly the same is dismissed, but subject to the above observation. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE skj True copy P.A. to Judge