GOVINDANKUTTY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is accused in two cases, viz., C.C.Nos.219 of 2011 and 220 of 2011 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur. He challenges Annexure -A5 complaints in both the cases under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, "Cr.P.C."). Petitioner is involved in offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 468, 465 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, "IPC").

(2.) ALLEGATIONS , common to the complaints, in brief, are as follows: The complainant is a limited company running chit fund business. The chairman of the company is authorised to initiate legal proceedings on behalf of the company. The accused was working as a litigation clerk in the company from 01.04.1979. On 01.09.1979, he was permanently appointed to that post. The duties of the accused, as litigation clerk, were to meet the lawyers of the company for filing suits, to do other matters related to litigations, and further, to receive money recovered through the court proceedings and to entrust the same to the company. While so, the accused committed breach of trust and cheated the company and appropriated about Rs.17,00,000/ -. He created false documents for committing the cheating and misappropriation of amounts. The accused, therefore, is guilty of the said offences.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that Annexure -A6 order in both the cases passed by the learned Magistrate are legally unsustainable for the fact that he has ordered enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. on the protest complaints filed by the 2nd respondent/complainant without passing any order on the final report. The facts show that Annexure -A1 complaints were forwarded by the court under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation. Thereafter, Annexure -A3 final reports were filed. In the final reports, it is mentioned that the investigation revealed that the dispute was in the nature of a civil case and a suit, O.S.No.404 of 2008 is pending before a competent court. And, therefore, the Police was of the view that no offence was made out. It is an admitted case that the complainant received notices after filing the negative reports, which is marked as Annexure -A4 in both cases. After receiving Annexure -A4 notices, the complainant approached the learned Magistrate with protest complaints (Annexure -A5). That is numbered as C.M.P.No.8232 of 2008 involved in Crl.M.C.No.468 of 2013 and C.M.P.No.8532 of 2008 involved in Crl.M.C.No.473 of 2013. Grievance of the petitioner is that the learned Magistrate instead of proceeding with the original complaints, ordered enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. in the protest complaints and that too, without any reference or order regarding the sustainability or not of the final reports.