THOMAS M C Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in Crl.M.C.No. 3222/2011 is the 1st accused in C.C.99/2011, a complaint filed by the 5th respondent therein alleging offences under Section 418, 420 and 506(2) read with Section 34 I.P.C. Crl.M.C.No. 3880/2011 was filed by the 2nd accused. Both of them seek to invoke jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the complaint with a plea that even by the averments in the complaint the offences alleged are not made out. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the complainant would submit that there are sufficient averments in the complaint to send the accused for trial.

(2.) Having heard either side, I find that it is needless for this Court to go deep into the dispute invoking jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. because the petitioners have got the remedy available under Section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Going by Section 245(2) Cr.P.C, I find that even on the first day of the appearance itself, the petitioners can urge for a discharge, if there is no sufficient averment in the complaint to send them for trial. A reading of Section 245 Cr.P.C. Would be appropriate for better appraisal.

(3.) In the result, both these petitions are disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to apply for discharge under Section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Upon such petition being filed, the trial court shall dispose of the same before framing the charge. The learned counsel for the petitioners sought for exemption from personal appearance of the petitioners. This is a matter to be considered by the trial court. If any circumstance exists, it is for the petitioners to apply for exemption from personal appearance which the trial court shall dispose of on merits.