The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 1005/2010 of Kilimanoor Police Station registered for offences punishable under sections 420, 464, 467 and r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Admittedly, a criminal complaint was filed by the second respondent, the defacto complainant alleging that the petitioners and the co-accused have forged a document. At the same time, the second respondent herein has instituted O.S.No. 173/2007 before the Sub Court, Attingal for realising an amount of Rs. 1,77,800/- together with 9% interest from the defendant who is the second respondent herein. Evidently, the bone of contention in both the said proceedings is a promissory note. The learned Government Pleader submitted that as part of the investigation the promissory note in dispute was forwarded for examination to the forensic laboratory and the report is yet to be received. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that, in fact, after conducting the examination of the documents a report Crl.M.C.NO. 598 of 2012 2 was already been forwarded to the investigating officer. Since, the promissory note in question is the subject matter in both the proceedings and the issues involved cannot be decided without conducting a proper enquiry into it I do not think that this Court will be justified in terminating the criminal proceedings abruptly by invoking the inherent jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners I am of the view that if the investigating officer is already received the report after the examination of the document in question it will only be appropriate for the investigating officer to expedite the investigation and on its completion to file the final report in tune with the provisions under section 173 Cr.P.C. in Crime No. 1005/2010 of Kilimanoor Police Station before the competent court. Once a final report is filed it will only be appropriate for the petitioners to take up the plea of discharge at the appropriate stage if they are so advised or such other action permissible under law. In the said circumstances, there will be a direction to the investigating officer in Crime No.1005/2010 to file a final report thereon expeditiously and at any rate, within a period of two months and needless to say that upon the filing of final report it will be open to the petitioners to take up the plea of Crl.M.C.NO. 598 of 2012 3 discharge if it is a charge sheet, in case they are so advised, at the appropriate stage. With the above observation this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is disposed of. Sd/-
C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JUDGE.
dlk