K C PALANISAMY Vs. STATE REP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 to quash the charge against the petitioners pending in C.C.No.18 of 2003 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-III, Coimbatore.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows: The respondent police filed charge sheet against the petitioners alleging that with the common intention of committing offences of forgery of valuable securities and using them as genuine they filed the same before the Deputy Registrar of Chits, Coimbatore in ARC No.309 to 314 of 2001 and thus A1 committed an offence under section 467 IPC r/w471 IPC and A2 to A4 under section 467 r/w 471 and 34 IPC.

(3.) The final report filed by the respondent has been taken on file as C.C.18 of 2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-III , Coimbatore. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the charge against the petitioners/accused should be quashed on the ground that even as per the averments made in the final report, the accused are alleged to have committed an offence under section 467,468 and 472 and also read with sec.34 IPC with intent to use the forged documents as genuine in the false claim petition filed by Cheran Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd., against the complainant K.Venkatachalam before the Deputy Registrar of Chits, Coimbatore in ARC Nos.309 to 314 of 2001.As per the final report itself, on 25.5.2002 the proceedings before the Deputy Registrar of Chits in ARC Nos.309 to 314 of 201 are pending. In such circumstances, the learned Magistrate ought not to have taken cognizance of the offences alleged in the final report since taking cognizance of the offence alleged to have been committed in respect of the document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any court is barred under Sec.195(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., Further, such a complaint shall be given only by the Court where the alleged documents have been used. Therefore, the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is against the provisions of the Court and entertaining the very complaint itself is abuse of process of court and the proceedings are liable to quashed.