This criminal miscellaneous case is filed by the petitioner, who is the defacto-complainant in Crime No.21/2008 of Aranmula police station now pending as C.C. 337/2008 on the file of the Judicial Fist Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta, seeking further investigation in the matter under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called 'the Code'). 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioner is the defacto-complainant in Crime No. 21/2008 of Ararnmula police station, now pending as C.C.337/2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta. The offences alleged are punishable under Section 420, 465, 467, 468 and read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the petitioner was that, on 15.12.2002, she applied for a loan for an amount of ₹ 25,000/- by pledging her landed property as loan No.HL-
270/02. Petitioner remitted an amount of ₹3,000/- towards process fees and pass book was also issued showing an amount of ₹ 25,000/-. The loan amount was also sanctioned for ₹ 25,000/- and EMI was fixed as ₹447/- per month payable in 120 months. She remitted seven installments and she committed the default from 8th installment onwards. When the petitioner’s son went to the bank to remit the defaulted installments, it was informed to him that there was a falsification of accounts of the petitioner by the branch manager and instead of ₹25,000/- loan availed was shown as ₹ 2,00,000/- and the manager forged all the loan transactions making the loan amount as ₹2,00,000/-
and after paying ₹ 25,000/- to the petitioner, mis-
appropriated the balance amount. The loan amounts were disbursed by cheque but only ₹ 22,000/- was paid to the petitioner. After that first accused Smt. Suvarna Vijayan, the Manager remitted an amount of ₹10,000/- in the account of the petitioner on 15.07.2005 in order to suppress the transaction. So the petitioner filed a private complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Pathanamthitta and it was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Crime No.21/2008 registered by Aranmula Police. The investigation was not properly conducted, material documents from the bank were not seized and the petitioner's passbook was also not seized by the investigating officer and without conducting proper investigation, the investigating officer filed final report, which was taken on file as C.C.337/2008. The petitioner filed Crl.M.C. 2192/2013 before this court, seeking further investigation and that petition was disposed of by this court, directing the petitioner to approach the trial court itself for this purpose. Accordingly, an application was filed before the trial court, but the trial court also dismissed the application. So the petitioner has no other remedy, except to approach this court, seeking the following relief:
1. Set aside the order in Crl.M.P.8231/2013 in C.C.No.337/2008 on the file of the JFMC-I, Pathanamthitta.
2. Direct the respondents to conduct further investigation on crime No.21/2008 of Aranmula police station now pending as C.C.No.337/2008 on the file of the JFMC-I, Pathanamthitta.
3. Respondent filed counter contending as follows:
“CMP before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta stating that the first accused has cheated 1,75,000/- Rupees by fraudulently sanction a loan from Kerala Housing Finance Ltd., Kozhenchery branch in the name of the complainant. Subsequently Cr.21/2008 U/s. 420, 465, 468 IPC was registered in Aranmula Police Station.
The case was investigated by Sri.Nanda kumar, Sub Inspector of Police, Aranmula. During the course of investigation, Investigating Officer had seized the document showing the application form and amount applied etc. Later the part of the second accused was incorporated in the case, He fraudulently acquired the title deed of 3 ½ cent of land from his grand mother and produced before the bank for acquiring the loan.
The complainant had applied for a loan from Kerala Housing Finance Ltd. only for 25,000/- and produced a title deed of 7 cents as collateral security. The first accused by the Manager of the Institution manipulated the document and sanctioned 2,00,000/- from the institution. But disbursed only 25,000/- to the complainant and given a pass book showing only the same amount. The balance amount of Rupees 1,75,000/- was cheated by the accused from the complainant.
The investigation of the case completed by the Investigating Officer on 23.06.2008 and laid charge against the first and second accused before the Hon'ble Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta. The case was in trial as CC 337/08 of the Hon'ble Court.
The accused were not arrested since they were absconded.
The above facts are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief”.
4. I have called for a report from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta, regarding the present stage of the case and it is seen from the proceedings paper of the court below that, the petitioner filed an application for re-investigation as Crl.M.P.8231/2013 and that was dismissed on 22.01.2013. It is also seen from the proceedings paper that though the present petitioner did not appear for giving evidence as well. On going through the allegations, this court feels that, there is no necessity to order further investigation by this court at this stage and the petitioner can adduce evidence before the court below itself through the learned Public Prosecutor, so that the court below can consider those documents also and if the learned Public Prosecutor wants the document to be sent for expert opinion for getting the documents examined, after summoning those documents and that course is also open to the petitioner.
So under the circumstances, this court feels that, there is no necessity to pass any orders in this application, ordering further investigation, considering the fact that, the case is of the year 2008 and evidence of the case has already been started and it appears from the proceedings paper that, the petitioner is not co-operating with the trial of the case, however leaving open the right of the petitioner, to adduce proper evidence, before the court below, through the learned Public Prosecutor, to vindicate her grievance and directing the lower court to consider those applications, if any field by the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the defacto-complainant and dispose of the same in accordance with law.
With the above observation, this criminal miscellaneous case is disposed of. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court, immediately.
Sd/-
K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy // P.A. to Judge ss