A V ABDURAHIMAN MUSALIYAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.55/03 pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Koyilandy. The 2nd respondent herein is the complainant. The complainant had filed a private complaint which was referred to the police under Sec.156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The police, after investigation, filed a negative final report. It is thereafter that the present protest complaint was filed by the 2nd respondent. Cognizance has been taken of the offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.420 of the IPC.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner narrates the tale of vows which the petitioner has been forced to endure from the year 2000 till now. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings against the petitioner is totally unjustified and amounts to abuse of process of the court. The continuation of the proceedings is working out miscarriage of justice against the petitioner. The petitioner is put to great prejudice, loss and suffering because of the undeserved pendency of the prosecution. The learned Magistrate is not taking up the matter for disposal. The complainant is making every endeavour to unnecessarily protract the proceedings. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come to this Court with a prayer that the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the proceedings.

(3.) I do note that the proceedings have been pending from 2000 though cognizance was taken only in 2003. I find no satisfactory reason to justify the invocation of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. at this belated hour. However, I do note that in all cases where cognizance is taken allegedly without sufficient justification, the accused has got a right to claim premature termination of the proceedings by discharge under Sec.245(2) or 245(1) of the Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is advised that it is not necessary to wait for the completion of the enquiry under Sec.244 of the Cr.P.C. and the petitioner will be justified in claiming discharge under Sec.245(2) of the Cr.P.C. itself.