CRL.MC No. 295 of 2007 · Kerala High Court

CRL.M.C.NO. 295 OF 2007 -: 2 :-proceedings against the petitioner. 3. It has often been repeated that the mere fact that the accused person is entitled for acquittal or discharge is not areason for this Court to invoke its extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. to prematurely terminate the proceedings against the indcitee. The procedure to be followed by the learned Magistrate is the one under Chapter-XIX-A of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner can appear before the learned Magistrate and raise the contention that the allegations against him are baseless and he is entitled to be discharged. Such claim for discharge must be considered by the learned Magistrate at the stage of Sec.239/240 of the Cr.P.C. Ifind no reason to invoke the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if unnecessary insistence were made on the personal appearance of the petitioner, it would work out great prejudice and hardship to the petitioner. I find no reason to insist that the petitioner must be personally present on all dates of posting. Thepetitioner can apply and I find no reason why the learnedMagistrate should not allow such request and permit the petitioner to be represented by counsel till a decision is taken CRL.M.C.NO. 295 OF 2007 -: 3 :-that the charges are liable to be framed against the petitioner. If no charges are liable to be framed, his personal appearance need not be insisted by the learned Magistrate. 4. With the above observations, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE)Nan///true copy//P.S. to Judge