A defendant can seek to defer a trial pending an investigation into fraud allegations against the complainant's claims.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS FRIDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 1497 OF 2026 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN ST NO.9 OF 2025 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,KOLLAM PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED IN ST. 9/2025/ DE FACTO COMPLAINANT IN CMP NO.1512/2025:

ANSIYA R AGED 25 YEARS PROPRIETOR AKM ENTERPRISES, ANSEER MANZIL,MANJAPPARA P.O, PALLIMUKKU, KOTTUKKAL, KOLLAM, PIN - 691533 BY ADVS.

SHRI.AMAL PARTHASARADHY SRI.GIBI.C.GEORGE RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT IN ST. NO.9/2025:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

2 ASHAMOL AGED 39 YEARS SREEDEVA TRADERS,3/2171-2134,MADATHIL KIZHAKKATHIL, MEENATHU CHERRY, KAVANADU, KOLLAM, PIN – 691003 PP. SRI. M.P.PRASANTH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R Dated this the 20^th day of February, 2026 The petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.9/2025 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kollam ( Trial Court) which has been filed by the 2^nd respondent alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 . 2. The petitioner has stated in the Criminal Miscellaneous Case that there is no legally enforceable debt payable by her to the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner was a purchaser of goods from the 2^nd respondent, who is a full- fledged wholesaler. The 2^nd respondent and her accountant, in furtherance of their common intention, fabricated 18 invoices for approximately 90,00,000/- and dishonestly induced the petitioner to transfer Rs.40,00,000/- by falsely representing that the goods were supplied. On internal audit, it was found that the goods were not supplied. Under the GST regime, movement of goods exceeding Rs.50,000/- mandates the generation of an E-way bill. While 50 genuine invoices were supported by valid E-Way bills and actual delivery of goods, the 18 disputed invoices were not backed by any E-Way Bill or proof of delivery. However, without supplying goods to the petitioner, the 2^nd respondent has made use of ten signed blank cheques issued by her as security, presented them to the bank, got them dishonored, and has filed five complaints in respect of ten cheques. The petitioner has immediately filed a complaint before the Chadayamangalam Police Station and Crime No.821/2025 has been registered against the 2^nd respondent for committing the offences punishable under Section 420, 471 and 120B r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The investigation in the crime is in progress. In the meantime, the Trial Court has scheduled the trial in the five complaints. If the trial commences before the filing of the final report in Crime No.821/2025, it would cause prejudice and severe hardship to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner prays that the Trial Court be directed to defer all further proceedings in S.T. No.9/2025, until the final report is filed in Crime No. 821/2025 of the Chadayamangalam Police Station. Hence, the Crl.M.C.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. In view of the limited relief that I proposes to pass, I dispense with notice to the 2^nd respondent.

4. The petitioner’s specific case is that, the 2^nd respondent has presented ten of her cheques without valid consideration. At the instance of the petitioner, the Chadayamangalam Police has registered Crime No.821/2025 as against the 2^nd respondent, and the investigation in the crime is in progress. Therefore, until such time, the final report is filed, the Trial Court may be directed to defer the proceedings