Kerala High Court
K.M.Balakrishnan Nair vs State Of Kerala on 23 January, 2009
Author: R.Basant
Bench: R.Basant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 87 of 2009()
1. K.M.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, 71 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
2. CHINMAYA MISSION EDUCATIONAL AND
For Petitioner :SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :23/01/2009
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 87 of 2009
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009
ORDER
The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 468 and 471 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The petitioner contends that the cognizance taken against him is bad and legally unsustainable for the reason that the dispute essentially is one purely civil in nature. The complainant has lost out in the civil suit, he having abandoned the two suits filed by him. In these circumstances it is prayed that invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the prosecution against him may be quashed.
2. I note that altogether there are three accused persons. They have already entered appearance before the learned Magistrate and they have been enlarged on bail. The report Crl.M.C. No. 87 of 2009 -: 2 :- received from the learned Magistrate shows that charges were framed as early as on 21.12.2007. The matter is ripe for trial and stands posted to 27.1.2009 for examination of witnesses. At this juncture that the petitioner has chosen to come before this court.
3. I note that cognizance has been taken as early as in 2007. Charges were framed on 21.12.2007. The matter stands posted for trial i.e. examination of witnesses to 27.1.2009. The petitioner has not chosen to challenge the initiation of prosecution against him so far. Though charges against him were framed as early as on 21.12.2007, he has not chosen to challenge the order framing charges so far.
4. I am called upon to invoke and exercise the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in favour of a person who has been sleeping over his right and who has woken from slumber only when the case was posted for trial/ examination of witnesses to 27/1/09. I am not persuaded to agree that such an extraordinary inherent jurisdiction can or deserves to be invoked. I am satisfied that I now need only direct the learned Magistrate to expeditiously complete the trial which is scheduled to commence on 27/1/09.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there Crl.M.C. No. 87 of 2009 -: 3 :- is absolutely no dispute regarding identity and the petitioner may be permitted to apply for exemption from appearance. Needless to say that such an application can be made and the learned Magistrate must consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders. In the absence of satisfactory reasons, I find no reason why the learned Magistrate should not consider such application favourably.
6. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed; but with specific two observations:
(i) that the trial which is scheduled to commence on 27/1/09 must be completed by the learned Magistrate as expeditiously as possible - at any rate, within a period of 4 months from 27/1/09; and
(ii) that the application by the accused persons for exemption from personal appearance must be considered on merits and in accordance with law by the learned Magistrate.
7. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge
Crl.M.C. No. 87 of 2009 -: 4 :-