JAYAPRAKASAN PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution interalia under Sections 406 and 420 read with 120B I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police. The petitioner has already entered appearance and has been enlarged on bail, it is submitted. The petitioner has come to this court with the prayer that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked to prematurely terminate the proceedings against the petitioner. The allegations are false and should not be accepted, it is contended.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have gone through the records produced. I must alertly remind myself of the nature and quality of the jurisdiction which I may called upon to invoke. That is an extraordinary inherent jurisdiction. Such jurisdiction has to be invoked only sparingly and in an exceptional case in aid of justice. It cannot certainly be invoked as a matter of course.

(3.) I shall carefully avoid any detailed expression of opinion on merits regarding the acceptability of the contention lest it may prejudice the interests of either of the parties. Suffice it to say that I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the petitioner must raise the plea for discharge before the learned Magistrate at the stage of Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. Premature termination proceedings can be claimed in a prosecution by an accused ordinarily and normally at the stage of Section 239/240 Cr.P.C. This court has jurisdictional competence to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C notwithstanding existence on such an ordinary remedy. But it must always be ensured that such inherent powers are invoked only under exceptional and compelling circumstances. This, I am not satisfied, is a fit case where such powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C can or ought to be invoked. The petitioner, I am satisfied, is left to say ordinary and normal course in the court for claiming discharge under Section 239/240 Cr.P.C.