IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
CRL.MC NO. 3529 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 126/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -I, KOYILANDY
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :-
K.A. GOPINATHAN MENOKI
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O. K.C. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
AGED 55 YEARS, GOKULAM HOUSE,
CHEROOPA P.O.,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673661
BY ADV K.RAKESH
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :-
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 SREEJAN O
AGED 55 YEARS
S/O. SEKHARAN, AGED 55 YEARS,
VAYAL PURAYIL HOUSE, EAST ROAD,
KOYILANDY, KOYILANDY P.O.,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673305
BY SRI V.S SREEJITH, PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 3529 OF 2022
2
ORDER
Dated this the 09th day of June, 2022 This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C') seeking to quash a complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'NI Act') taken on files by Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandy, Kozhikode District (for short 'court below') as S.T.No.126/2021.
2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C was not conducted by the court below prior to taking the decision to issue process to the petitioner. It is further contended that a complaint has been lodged by the petitioner against the 2nd respondent alleging cheating and after conducting investigation, the final report has been laid by the police. According to him, those are sufficient grounds to quash the complaint.
CRL.MC NO. 3529 OF 2022 3
3. This court finds that the documents now proposed to be relied on by the learned counsel for quashing the complaint require more evidence to be adduced for its admission in evidence. Moreover, it is noticed that the complaint has been taken on file after recording the sworn statement of the complainant and therefore there is no basis in contending that enquiry as contemplated by Section 202 Cr.P.C has not been conducted in the case by the Magistrate while taking the complaint on file. The petitioner can adduce the evidence now sought to be relied on for quashing the complaint, during trial.
Crl.M.C fails for the reasons and is dismissed.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH JUDGE SMA CRL.MC NO. 3529 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3529/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES :-
Annexure A A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED UNDER SECTION 190(1)(A) CR.P.C. R/W SECTION 142 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT DATED 4-1-2021 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER Annexure B A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.787/2020 OF THE MAVOOR POLICE STATION DATED 24-11-2020 Annexure C A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE SENT BY THE PETITIONER'S ADVOCATE TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT'S ADVOCATE