AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 260 wordsBechu Kurian Thomas, J
Petitioner challenges the complaint in C.C. No.744/2016 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kasargod, alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Though the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the very offence alleged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, will not lie due to the peculiar circumstances, I am of the view that the contentions advanced are all matters which fall within the realm of the disputed fact and therefore, the remedy under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked.
On noticing the disinclination of this Court, Sri. C.S.Bissimon, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that since a non-bailable warrant has already been issued against the petitioner and the case has been transferred to the long pending register, petitioner apprehends that he will be remanded to custody even if he appears and applies for bail.
Having regard to the above submission and after having heard the learned Public Prosecutor as well, I am of the view that this criminal miscellaneous case can be disposed of with a direction.
Accordingly, while rejecting the challenge against the complaint under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Kasargod, is directed to consider and pass orders of a positive nature on the application for recall of warrant and for grant of bail submitted by the petitioner in L.P. No.52/2021, provided the applications are filed on or before 23.02.2024.
Criminal miscellaneous case is disposed of with the above observations.