T. THOMAS MATHAI Vs. JOSEPH ALEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.962 of 2000 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Ernakulam. A complaint is filed by first respondent herein against the petitioner alleging offences under Ss. 417, 420, 465, 468, 406 and 379 IPC. The private complaint was first referred to the Police under Sec. 156(3) Cr.P.C. and Police submitted a final report, referring the case. Thereafter, first respondent filed a protest complaint, which is pending consideration before the court below.

(2.) As per the allegations in the complaint, petitioner and first respondent were school-mates and old friends. The complainant was abroad in connection with employment and he can be in India in every alternate 35 days, on working arrangement. When the complainant was away, the entire household affairs of complainant was managed by his son, till his accidental death in 1996. Since there was nobody else to look after the affairs, the complainant executed a power of attorney in favour of the petitioner. The complainant's wife also executed a power of attorney. The management of the construction work of his house and other property matters were entrusted with the petitioner who expressed, his willingness to help the complainant.

(3.) The petitioner and his counsel were absent at the time of hearing. On going through the petition, I find that the main ground raised is that no offence under Sec. 406 IPC is attracted in this case, since the complainant has not mentioned what are the properties entrusted to the petitioner.