KOMALAVALLY v. STATE OF KERALA and ORS.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2017/21ST ASHADHA, 1939** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2183 of 2017 ()** ## **---------------------------** ## **102/2016 OF SPECIAL COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT** **-----------** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **--------------------------------** **KOMALAVALLY, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.VIKRAMAN NAIR, TC NO.03/1091, GOKULAM HOUSE, UDAYAGIRI, CHEMBAZHANTHY P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** ## **BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.NAVAS SRI.T.K.SASIKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:** **--------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA,** - **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 687 031** **2. GORGON T.,** - **AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.THEESMAS, TC 33/243, MOTHER HOUSE, VETTUCAUD, BEACH P.O., TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695007** **3. THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER,** ## **THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY 695 001** **R1 , R 3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SAIGI JACOB PALATTY.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-07-2017, ALONG WITH CRMC. NO. 2387/2017, AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **sdr/-** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2183 of 2017 ()** ## **---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS -----------------------------------** **ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS CC NO.102/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE TEMPORARY SPECIAL COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR TRIAL OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT CASES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 5.12.2015 ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.645/14 OF THE VANCHIYOOR POLICE ANNEXURE A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE NO.317712 DATED 7.4.2015 ANNEXURE A5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 22.6.2015 ANNEXURE A6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22.6.2015 ANNEXURE A7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED NIL ANNEXURE A8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22.6.2015 ANNEXURE A9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS CC NO.1362/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE TEMPORARY SPECIAL COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR TRIAL OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT CASES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ANNEXURE A10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 15.9.2014 ANNEXURE A11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS ST NO.434/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-X, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ANNEXURE A12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS CC NO.103/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE TEMPORARY SPECIAL COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE FOR TRIAL OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT CASES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ANNEXURE A13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE NO.296160** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2183 of 2017 ()** ## **---------------------------** **ANNEXURE A14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 10.11.2016 OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **ANNEXURE A 15 COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH RECEIPT.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL** **-----------------------------------------** **/TRUE COPY/** **PA TO JUDGE** **sdr/-** ## ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ----------------------------- Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 --------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of July, 2017. ## O R D E R The prayers in these Crl.M.Cs are for orders from this Court so as to quash the impugned complaints produced as Anx.A-I in these cases. The petitioners herein are the accused for offence punishable under under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, instituted on the basis of a complaint preferred by the complainant concerned, who has been impleaded herein as R-2 in these cases. The petitioner in Crl.M.C.Nos.2183 & 2400 of 2017 is the mother of the petitioner in Crl.M.C.Nos.2387 & 2581 of 2017. 2. Crl.M.C.No.2183/2017 arises out of C.C.No.102/2016 on the file of the Temporary Special Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (N.I.Act Cases), Thiruvananthapuram. Crl.M.C.No.2387/2017 arises out of C.C.No.1362/2016 on the file of the above said Magistrate Court. Whereas Crl.M.C.No.2400/2017 is in respect of C.C.No.103/2016 on the file of the above said court. Crl.M.C.No.2581/2017 arises out of S.T.No.434/2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-X, Thiruvananthapuram. The ::2:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 cheque amounts involved in the above referred C.C.Nos.102/2016, 1362/2016, 103/2016 & S.T.No.434/2016 are Rs.2 lakhs, Rs.20 lakhs, Rs.3 lakhs and Rs.2.24 lakhs. The main ground urged by the petitioners in these cases is that the very institution of the impugned complaints would amount to grave abuse of the process of the court inasmuch as the petitioners never had any transaction with the respective complainant in these cases and that the blank signed cheques given by the petitioners to R-2 in Crl.M.C.No.2387/2017 has been misused by her and that the above said complaints have been falsely implicated against the petitioners. Petitioners would place serious reliance on Anx.A-14 in Crl.M.C.No.2183/2017 issued by the 3[rd] respondent Thiruvananthapuram City Police Commissioner, which according to the petitioners would establish the veracity of their contentions, etc. 3. After admitting these Crl.M.Cs., notice has been duly taken out to the respective complainants in each of these cases. Registry, after verification with the speed post centre has reported that notice to R-2 in Crl.M.C.No.2183/2017 send by registered speed post has been duly served on that party. It is further reported by the Registry that notice to R-2 in Crl.M.C.No.2387/2017 has been returned with the endorsement “addressee left”. But it is seen that notice to R-2 (complainant) in ::3:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 Crl.M.C.No.2387/2017 has been duly taken out to the party in the address as shown by that party (complainant) in the impugned Anx.A-1 complaint. So it is only to be ordered that the said notice taken out by registered post to R-2 is only to the treated as having been duly completed. Notice to R-2 in Crl.M.C.Nos.2400 & 2581 of 2017 has been duly served and Sri.M.Abdul Rasheed, learned counsel, has appeared for R-2 in those cases. PP has taken notice for other official respondents. Thus service is complete. 4. Heard Sri.C.A.Navas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in these cases, Sri.M.Abdul Rasheed, learned counsel appearing for R-2 in Crl.M.C.Nos.2400 & 2581 of 2017 and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Prosecutor appearing for the official respondents in these cases. 5. Going by the nature of the allegations raised by the petitioners, this Court is of the view that it may not be proper for this Court to enter into detailed adjudication of the various factual issues posed by the petitioners and the contesting respondents, especially taking into account the nature of the orders that are proposed by this court for disposing of these matters. After these cases were admitted and after getting instructions from the official respondents through the ::4:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 ## learned Prosecutor, this Court has passed a detailed order dated ## 3.4.2017 in these 4 cases which reads as follows: “Admit these Cri.M.Cs. Issue notice to R2 in all these cases by speed post, returnable within two weeks. P.P. takes notices for R1 and R3 in these cases. Cri.M.A.No.3054 of 2017 in Crl.M.C.No.2183 of 2017 Crl.A.No.3368 of 2017 in Crl.MC. No 2387 of 2017 Crl.M.ANo 3379 of 2017 in Crl.M.C.No.2400 of 2017 & Cri.M.A.No.3680 of 2017 in Crl.M.C.No.2581 of 2017 Pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court in the first 3 cases, the third respondent, City Police Commissioner, Thiruvananthapuram, has filed a statement dated 1.4.2017 through the learned prosecutor, wherein it has been stated in paragraph 4 on page 3 thereof that no petition was received either from Smt. Komalavally (petitioner in Crl.M.C. Nos.2183 and 2400 of 2017) or from her daughter Aishwarya (petitioner in Crl.M.C.Nos.2387 and 2581 of 2017) in any of the police stations/offices in the jurisdiction of the Thiruvananthapuram City Police in respect of the alleged misuse of the cheques related to Section 138 cases pending before the Magistrate's Court against Smt.Komalavally and her daughter Aishwarya as mentioned in Annexures A1, A9, A11 and A12. 2. In the light of Annexure A14 proceedings (in Crl.M.C.No.2183 of 2017) of the third respondent Thiruvananthapuram City Police Commissioner, it is ordered that it will be open to the petitioners' in these cases to submit necessary petitions before the third respondent detailing out the specific allegations relating to the alleged misuse of the cheques involved in each of these four cases and the third respondent may consider the allegations therein and may ascertain the correctness or otherwise of those allegations by conducting a petition enquiry on those matters through a senior officer not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police, with notice to the petitioners' herein as well as the persons against whom allegations are made and after the conduct of such petition enquiry, the third respondent may ascertain whether or not any cognizable offences are disclosed in the matters and if any cognizable offences are disclosed, it will be open to the third respondent to give necessary instructions to the police authorities concerned to register crimes and proceed further with the investigation thereof in the manner prescribed in the Cr.P.C. If on the other hand, the third respondent after conclusion of the petition enquiry is satisfied that no cognizable offences are so made, then he will be at liberty to close the matter. Necessary reports regarding the conclusion of each of these petition enquiries may be rendered by the third respondent and reports in that regard may be submitted by the third respondent before this Court. This process may be completed within a period of two months from the date on which the petitions are received from these petitioners along with a copy of this order. The petitioners shall submit petitions before ::5:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 the third respondent as directed above within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Learned prosecutor will ensure that copy of this order is served through R3. 3. All further proceedings in relation to the respective impugned Annexure A1 complaints in these cases before the trial court concerned will stand deferred.” Thereafter a statement was filed on behalf of the 3[rd] respondent, Commissioner of Thiruvananthapuram City, through the Assistant Commissioner of Police, District Crime Branch, Thiruvananthapuram City, and the said report was made available through a memo dated 10.7.2017 of the learned Prosecutor produced in this case. The said report furnished on 10.7.2017 by the 3[rd] respondent Commissioner of Police, reads as follows: “REPORT SUBMITTED BY M.S.SANTHOSH, ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DISTRICT CRIME BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY ON BEHALF OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT It is submitted that Smt.Komalavally and her daughter Smt.Aiswariya, the petitioners in the above Crl.MCs have submitted petitions before the District Police Chief, Thiruvananthapuram City as per the direction of the Hon’ble High Court. The District Police Chief vide No.G9/29079/2017/TC, dated 17.04.2017 and No.G9/31106/2017/TC, dated 24.04.2017 has authorized me to conduct an enquiry into the petitions and to furnish report before the Hon’ble High Court. It is submitted that 4 cases are pending trial before the Temporary Special Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram and Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- X, Thiruvananthapuram against the petitioners u/s 138 Negotiable Instruments Act as CC No.102/2016, CC No.103/2016, ST No.434/2016 and CC No.1362/2016. The gist of the findings on the enquiry conducted by me is furnished below. > 1. Crl.MC 2183/2017 filed by the petitioner Komalavally against Gorgon ( against CC No.102/2016 Temporary Special Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court Thiruvananthapuram) ::6:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 The gist of the case is that the petitioner Komalavally borrowed 2 lakh rupees from Gorgon in the year 2014 and did not repaid the money. On enquiry it is revealed that, during the year 2014, Hilary, a friend and neighbor of Gorgon the complainant of the above case asked 2 lakh rupees for Komalavally and as such Gorgon handed over 2 lakh rupees to Hilary. Hilary handed over the above said 2 lakh rupees to one Girija Thampi who self-introduced to him as Komalavally. Girija Thampi has given a promissory note and a cheque bearing No.296160 of UCO Bank of Komalavally to Hilary as security. Girija Thampi paid the said money to Komalavally at a higher rate of interest. Komalavally did not pay either interest or the principal amount. Gorgon demanded Hilary to return the money. So Hilary approached Girija Thampi for giving back the money. At that time she disclosed that she is not Komalavally and the money was actually given to Komalavally. Girija Thampi then asked Hilary to file a case against Komalavally. Since Gorgon was the original creditor and in possession of the signed cheque and promissory note, he filed this case against Komalavally as per sec 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. On enquiry it is further revealed that Komalavally and Gorgon were not known to each other at the time of the transaction and also that he did not give the money directly to Komalavally. 2. Crl.MC 2400/2017 filed by the petitioner Komalavally against Hilary.T (against CC No.103/2016 Temporary Special Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court Thiruvananthapuram) The gist of the case is that the petitioner Komalavally borrowed 3 lakh rupees from Hilary in the year 2014 and did not repaid the money. On enquiry it is revealed that during the year 2014, the complainant Hilary paid an amount of rupees 3 lakhs at 2 % interest to Girija Thampi who self-introduced as Komalavally, as recommended by one Rajan, his neighbor as well as the mediator of Girija Thampi. Hilary gave 3 lakh rupees at an interest of 2% to Girija Thampi who selfintroduced as Komalavally. Girija Thampi has given a promissory note and a cheque bearing No.296169 of UCO Bank to Hilary as security. Girija Thampi paid the said money to Komalavally at a higher rate of interest. Komalavally did not pay either interest or the principal amount. Hilary demanded Girija Thampi to return the money. At that time she disclosed that she is not Komalavally and the money was ::7:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 actually given to Komalavally. Girija Thampi then told Hilary who is in possession of the signed cheque and promissory note, to file a case against Komalavally and hence he filed this case against Komalavally as per sec 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. On enquiry it is further revealed that Komalavally and Hilary were not known to each other at the time of the transaction and also that he did not give the money directly to Komalavally. 3. Crl.MC 2581/2017 filed by the petitioner Aiswariya against Hilary.T (against ST No.434/2016 Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- X, Thiruvananthapuram) The gist of the case is that the petitioner Aiswariya D/o Komalavally borrowed 2 lakh rupees from Hilary in the year 2014 and did not pay the money back. On enquiry it is revealed that Aiswariya borrowed 2 lakh rupees from Hilary on the security of a promissory note and cheque bearing No.437257 of SBI and also that, Aiswariya did not give back the borrowed 2 lakh rupees to Hilary. 4. Crl.MC 2387/2017 filed by the petitioner Aiswariya against Girija Thampi (against CC No.1362/2016 Temporary Special Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court Thiruvananthapuram) The gist of the case is that the petitioner Aiswariya D/o Komalavally borrowed 20 lakh rupees from Girija Thampy in the year 2004 and did not paid the money back. On enquiry it is revealed that Girija Thampi and Komalavally were known to each other and from the year 2004 onwards they were engaged in financial dealings. Usually Girija Thampi accepted money from others at low rate of interest and gave the same to Komalavally at higher rates on the security of cheques and promissory notes of Komalavally. On questioning, Komalavally stated that she paid back all the money borrowed from Girija Thampi with interest, but the cheques and promissory notes are not received back. Komalavally also stated that, the above said cheques and promissory notes were used for the purpose of filing cases against her and her daughter Aiswariya by Girija Thampi and others. But on questioning Girija Thampi, she stated that she paid 20 lakh rupees to Aiswariya but she did not repaid the same, so she filed this case. On questioning Komalavally and Aiswariya, they stated that they have already paid the amounts to Girija Thampi. But on contra, Girija Thampi stated that she did not ::8:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 receive the money back. But there is no supporting documents to prove their claim. In connection with the above transactions, a blank cheque vide No.317712 of UCO Bank, Thiruvananthapuram was given by Komalavally as a security for an earlier transaction to Girija Thampi. She gave the same to one Asokan and using that cheque Asokan send an Advocate Notice to Komalavally through Adv.Kazhakuttom G.S.Pradeep claiming an amount of rupees 30 Lakhs. In this regard the parties were summoned by Poojapura Police on the basis of a petition filed by Komalavally before the District Police Chief, Thiruananthapuram City. Asokan disclosed before the police that the cheque was given to him by Akhilesh, the sonin-law of Girija Thampi and that Komalavally was not known to him and he hadn’t any money transactions with Komalavally. Asokan returned the cheque to Komalavally and withdrawn his claim. From the above, it is clear that the cheques received from Komalavally were misused by Girija Thampi. It is submitted that in the same manner the cheque No.288441 issued by Aiswariya D/o Komalavally was also misused by Girija Thampi and filed the case in CC No.1362/2016. It is submitted that Komalavally has filed a petition before the Minister for Home & Vigilance alleging misuse of cheques issued by her and her daughter and Vanchiyoor Police has registered a case in Cr.No.645/2014 u/s 420, 504(1), 34 IPC and Sec.3 r/w 17 of Kerala Money Lenders Act against Girija Thampi and Rajan a mediator and the case is pending trial before the Hon’ble Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court as CC No.2311/2014. Komalavally referred the above cheque No.317712 and cheque No.288441 of UCO Bank in her statement given before the Vanchiyoor Police. On enquiry it is revealed that out of the 3 cheques received from Komalavally and Aiswariya being the security for the debts, Girija Thampi had given cheque No.296160 to Gorgon and cheque No.296169 to Hilary for filing cases against Komalavally and used cheque No.288441 by herself to file case against Aiswariya claiming Rs.20 Lakhs. It is also revealed that Aiswariya borrowed an amount of rupees 2 lakhs from Hilary on the strength of cheque No.437257 of SBI and the amount is not repaid. Submitted. M.S.Santhosh Asst. Commissioner of Police District Crime Branch Thiruvananthapuram City” ::9:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 Later, the learned Prosecutor was requested to get the up to date instructions from the 3[rd] respondent as to the further action taken in respect of the matters covered by the above said report furnished on 10.7.2017. Pursuant to that, the Prosecutor has made available a further report dated 12.7.2017 on behalf of the 3[rd] respondent which reads as follows: “It is most humbly submitted that I am authorized to conduct the further investigation of Vanchiyoor Police Station Cr. 645/2014 U/s 420, 506(i),34 IPC, Sec.3 r/w 17 of Money Lenders Act by the Dy.Commissioner of Police (A&C), Thiruvananthapuram City vide order No. D1-46742/2017/TC, Dated: 24.06.2017. The complainant in the above said case is Smt. Komalavally D/o Kamalakshiamma, age -57, Arun Nivas, Udayagiri junction, Chempazhanthi ward, Pangappara village, Thiruvananthapuram. Smt. Girija Thampi D/o Karthyani, age-67, Thiruvathira veedu, MNRA-64, TC 36/374 (2), Manavanagar, Perunthanni ward, Pettah Village, Thiruvananthapuram and Sri. Rajan S/o Anu Grace, Punnamoodu House, Vettukad are the 1[st] and 2[nd] accused respectively in this case. The brief of the case is that the accused persons with the common intention of cheating the complainant and obtaining illegal gains, lent money at exorbitant rates of interest to the complainant after obtaining cheques and stamp papers from her as surety . Thereafter the accused intimidated the complainant and sent legal notice for Rs.20,00,000/- on the strength of the two cheque leaves bearing Nos. 317713, 288441 of UCO Bank received from the complainant as assurance since the complainant was defaulted the interest continuously. The case in Cr.645/2014 has been registered at Vanchiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram City by the Station House officer Sri. V. Ashoka Kumar on 20.5.2014 on the strength of the petition of Smt. Komalavally received from the then Home Minister of Kerala vide No. 6294/M (Home & Vigilance) through the District Police Chief, Thiruvananthapuram City. ::10:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 The investigation of the case has been taken over by Sri. Madhusoodhanan Nair, the then Sub Inspector of Police ( Crime Bureau), Vanchiyoor Police Station on 25.5.2014. Even though, he conducted search in the house of the 1[st] accused on 27.5.2014, no cheques received by the accused from the complainant as assurance can be seized from there. During the course of investigation of the case, the accused A1 & A2 has obtained anticipatory bail from the Hon’ble District Court, Thiruvananthapuram on 13.6.2014 by submitting Crl. MC, No.1373/14, 1456/14 respectively. The investigation of the case has been completed and charge sheeted by the investigating officer on 25.7.2014 and the same was received at the Hon’ble Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court as CC 2311/2014. At present the case is under the consideration of Hon’ble Judl. First Class Magistrate Court –XI, Thiruvananthapuram as pending trial. Mean while the complainant Smt. Komalavally submitted a complaint before the District Police Chief, Thiruvananthapuram City as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala and the same was endorsed to the Asst. Commissioner of Police, District Crime Branch, Thiruvananthapuram City for enquiry and report. In his report, two cheques of the complainant were mentioned which was handed over to the accused as assurance for the money received from them as loan. Out of the two cheques, one of them has been used by Smt. Girija Thampi for filing a case in Sec. 138 NI Act before the Temporary Special Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram for Rs.20,00,000/- as CC 1362/2016. A legal notice has also been sent to Smt. Komalavally for Rs.30,00,000/- by Sri. Asokan through the Adv. Kazhakuttom G.S Pradeep on the strength of the other cheque No.317712. Smt. Komalavally has lodged a complaint before the District Police Chief, Thiruvananthapuram City since said Asokan was not familiar to her and finally the cheque was returned to Smt. Komalavally. Thereafter, as per the report of the Asst. Commissioner of Police, District Crime Branch, Thiruvananthapuram City the Dy. Commissioner of Police (Admn & Crime), Thiruvananthapuram City has entrusted the further investigation of the case in Cr. 645/2014 of Vanchiyoor Police Station to the Asst. Commissioner of Police, Shanghumguhom vide order No. D1/46742/2017/ TC, dated: 24.6.2017. I have taken over the charge of ACP Shangumughom on 03.07.17. On the basis of the above order, I submitted a report before the Hon’ble Judl. First Class Magistrate Court-XI, Thiruvananthapuram to stop the further procedures of CC 2311/2014 and to issue necessary orders for the further investigation of the case in Cr. 645/2014 of Vanchiyoor Police Station. ::11:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 For conducting the further investigation of the case, sanction has to be obtained from the Hon’ble Court for further investigation of the case. Further the two cheques, mentioned above are to be subjected for the FSL examination and more investigation has to be conducted to find out whether any other accused are included in this crime. Hence it is reported that a period of six months is required for completing the further investigation of the case. Dated this the 12[th ] day of July 2017 Submitted Shanihan. A. R Asst. Commissioner of Police Shanghumughom Sub Division, Thiruvananthapuram City” 6. This Court is of the considered view that since the allegations and counter allegations of the rival parties are now pending investigation it may not be proper for this Court to enter into any assessment of the various issues in that regard. Learned Prosecutor submits on the basis of instructions from the 3[rd] respondent that steps are being taken by the 3[rd] respondent to ensure that the investigation/further investigation in respect of C.C.No.2311/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-XI, Thiruvananthapuram (arising out of Crime No.645/2014 of Vanchiyoor Police Station) is carried out and that it is expected that investigation in that regard will be completed within a period of 4 months. But that since earlier final report was submitted before the competent Magistrate Court, sanction will have to be obtained from that court before ::12:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 proceeding with further investigation. Therefore, it is for the Investigating Officer concerned to take immediate steps so as to secure sanction from the competent Magistrate Court and then proceed with the further investigation in the above matters and he shall ensure that further investigation in respect of the matter arising out of petition enquiry, and the enquiry shall be finalised without much delay, at any rate, within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The said Investigating Officer will produce a copy of this order before the learned Magistrate, who is dealing with the above referred C.C.No.2311/2014 for information and necessary action. The Investigating Officer should ensure that outcome of the investigation is intimated to the petitioners in these cases as well as R-2 (complainant). It is further ordered in the interest of justice that all further proceedings in respect of the impugned complaints in the present petitions before the trial court concerned in these 4 cases will stand deferred for a period of 8 months from 1.8.2017. If after conclusion of the above said investigation, the parties have any grievance, it is for them to workout their remedies in accordance with law. If the petitioner or the 2[nd] respondent wants to utilise any of the materials in respect of the above petition enquiries/investigation, it is open to them to summon any such ::13:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 necessary documents from the police authorities concerned and if the learned Magistrate is satisfied that those proceedings are relevant for the adjudication of the issues in the trial in these cases then such pleas should be considered. It is made clear that it will be open to the accused and complainant in these cases to summon any witnesses from the Police Department for adducing any evidence on the above said matters and if such pleas are found to be relevant, it is for the Magistrate to consider them appropriately. The above said order deferring the above trial in these cases will be effective till 31.3.2018 and thereafter the trial court concerned may proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 7. Sri.C.A.Navas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, would submit that this Court may direct the trial court concerned in these cases to grant personal exemption to the accused in these cases by virtue of the enabling powers under Sec.205 of the Cr.P.C., etc. In this regard, it is made clear that after commencement of the further proceedings before the trial court after 31.3.2018, it will be open to the petitioners to file appropriate applications under Sec.205 of the Cr.P.C seeking personal exemption in which case the trial court shall consider those applications in the light of the legal principles laid by this Court ::14:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2183, 2387, 2400 & 2581 of 2017 in Reddy v. Excel Glasses Ltd. reported in 2010 (3) KLT SN 11 (Case No.14) as well as the judgments in Bhaskar Industries Ltd. v. Dhiwani Denim & Apparel Ltd. reported in AIR 2001 SC 3625 & Ajith Kumar Chakravorthy & ors. v. Serampore Municipality reported in 1989 Crl.L.J. 523, etc. 8. It is made clear that none of the observations made by this Court hereinabove shall be construed, even remotely, as an expression on the merits of the controversy either in relation to the investigation now being conducted by the Police or in respect of the matter in the trial in these cases. The petitioners will produce copy of this order before the trial courts concerned. With these observations and directions, the Crl.M.Cs stand finally disposed of. ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge. bkn/-