Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1941 Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 IN C.C.NO.1499 OF 2015 OF THE COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, CHERTHALA CRIME NO.513/2009 OF AROOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2: VINU S/O.PETER, KODUVELIL, NEAR KOCHUVELI KAVALA, CHANDIROOR P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADVS. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.) SMT.MITHA SUDHINDRAN SMT.POOJA PANKAJ RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL. RAMESHAN, S/O KESHAVAN, KUZHUPALLIL, CHANDIROOR P.O, R2 CHERTHALA *[ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.11.2016 IN CRL.M.A.NO.11613/2016 IN CRL.M.C.NO.7486/16]
R1 BY SRI. T.R RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 2
ORDER
Dated this the 17th day of March, 2020
In the petition on hand, a protest complaint filed by the defacto complainant against the petitioner, herein and pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Cherthala for consideration, is sought to be quashed. The defacto complainant has originally lodged a First Information Statement before the police alleging that the petitioner alongwith the 1 st accused has committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 294 (b), 447, 506(ii), 323 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). Investigation was commenced and on concluding that a Final Report was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Cherthala referring the case as a false one. Thereafter, a protest complaint was preferred by the defacto complainant before the said court alleging that the petitioner alongwith the 1st accused has committed offences punishable under Sections 447, 294 (b), 341, 323, 506(ii) read with Section 34 IPC.
Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 3
2. Allegations in the complaint are that, the 1 st accused and his father who were running a workshop namely SVW Metal
Industries and Metal Crafts without valid licence or authorisation, had created sound pollution by working machines during night. Accused are residing on the northern side of the house of the complainant and in view of the sound pollution
caused, he lodged complaint before the authorities. It was agreed by the accused before the authorities that workshop will not be run during night. But, on 14.09.2009, during night, the accused and their father caused the workshop to function. The complainant questioned the father of the accused but the latter criminally intimidated him. On 16.09.2009, in furtherance of their common intention, the accused criminally trespassed into the courtyard of the defacto complainant and uttered obscene
words at him. The 1st accused wrongfully restrained him by holding his hands, 2nd accused fisted thrice on his back, 1 st accused fisted on his chest and the 2 nd accused inflicted a blow on his head with a wooden stick. Hearing the hue, the neighbours gathered and in front of them, the 2 nd accused threatened to kill him. Thereafter, the accused left the place. Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 4
3. The protest complaint was taken cognizance of by the Magistrate and registered on its file as C.C.No.542 of 2011. Trial was held against the 1st accused and he was acquitted vide
judgment dated 01.10.2015, copy of which is appended to the
petition on hand as Annexure C. The 2 nd accused did not turn up to attend the proceedings and therefore, the case against him was split up and refiled as C.C.No.1499 of 2015 and that is pending consideration of the court at present. In that scenario, the 2nd accused has approached this Court seeking to quash the prosecution pending against him on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Cherthala as C.C.No.1499 of 2015.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
contended that the trial held against the 1st accused ended in acquittal for want of adequate evidence and therefore, it is unlikely for the trial proposed to be held against him to end in conviction. According to him, the case originated from the protest complaint was a counter blast to a case registered against the complainant at the instance of the petitioner herein
and now pending as C.C.No.205 of 2010. It is contended by the learned counsel that since the trial against the 1 st accused ended in acquittal, in view of the common evidence proposed
Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 5 by the prosecution to be relied on, it is highly improbable for the trial to be culminated in conviction of the petitioner herein. According to the learned counsel, it would only be a time consuming process and it is expedient in the interest of justice to quash the prosecution that stands against the petitioner.
5. Though, the 2nd respondent was represented by a counsel in the case, he did not turn up to argue the case.
6. It is true that, the trial against the 1 st accused, a
co-accused has already been ended in his acquittal. A perusal of the Final Report, which formed the basis for the court for taking cognizance of and registering C.C. No.1499/2015 on its file would reveal that there is substantial difference in the role allegedly played by the petitioner from those allegedly committed by them. Though the witnesses turned hostile as against the other accused, it cannot be inferred that a similar stand would be taken by them
against the petitioner also. Only on holding the trial, it could be ascertained. From the materials made available by the prosecution in CC No.1499/2015 a prima facie case of commission of offences is made out against the petitioner. Therefore, it is expedient in the interest of justice that the trial must be proceeded with as against the petitioner. Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 6 In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court finds no reason to quash C.C.No.1499 of 2015 pending on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Cherthala as against the petitioner herein. In the result, the Crl.M.C is dismissed. Sd/- MARY JOSEPH JUDGE NAB Crl.MC.No.7486 OF 2016 7
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.513/2009 OF AROOR POLICE STATION, DATED 13/11/2009. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT IN CMP NO.94/2011 BEFORE THE COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE II, CHERTHALA DATED 5/1/2011 ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.C NO.542/2011 OF THE COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE II,CHERTHALA DATED 01.10.2015.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P A TO JUDGE