High Court Kerala High Court

Santo vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Public … on 6 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
Santo vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Public … on 6 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3211 of 2008()


1. SANTO,AGED 38,KOZHIPURAM HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :06/10/2008

 O R D E R
                            R.BASANT, J.
                         ----------------------
                      Crl.M.C.No.3211 of 2008
                     ----------------------------------------
               Dated this the 6th day of October 2008

                                O R D E R

The short grievance of the petitioner, who along with the co-

accused faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable

inter alia Section 8 of the Kerala Abkari Act and under Section 307

read with 34 I.P.C, is that a counter case filed by him has not been

committed to the court of Session yet. But still the learned

Sessions Judge is making steps to expeditiously list the sessions

case that is S.C.No.50/07 for trial. At the time when this Crl.M.C

was filed, cognizance has not been taken in the counter case filed

by the complainant. Directions were issued to the learned J.F.C.M,

Mannarkkad. Report of the learned Magistrate now shows that

cognizance has already been taken now as C.C.No.248/08. The

matter stands posted for appearance of the accused to 31/12/2008,

it is submitted.

2. I am at a loss to understand why the learned Magistrate,

even after being appraised of the fact that the allegations are in

the nature of a case and counter case and that S.C.No.50/07, the

main case, is about to be listed for trial, posted the case to a distant

date, that is 31/12/2008. The learned Magistrate must have shown

a sense of urgency and must have attempted to expeditiously

Crl.M.C.No.3211/08 2

complete the proceedings in C.C.No.248/08. If, as a matter of fact,

C.C.No.248/08 and S.C.No.50/07 are in the nature of allegations

and counter allegations, the learned Magistrate must expeditiously

take steps to commit S.C.No.248/08 under Section 323 I.P.C. It will

be a traversity of justice, if the Sessions case were taken up for trial

and disposed of before the counter case, if that be a counter case, is

committed to the court of Session. The petitioner can apprise the

learned Magistrate of the need for expeditious action in

C.C.No.248/08. The learned Magistrate must advance the case, if

necessary and pass appropriate orders and consider the request to

commit the case as C.C.No.323 on merits. The petitioner can

request the learned Sessions Judge not to list S.C.No.50/07 for trial

on the ground that the same and C.C.No.248/08 are in the nature of

an allegation and counter allegation. The learned Sessions Judge

must also consider such request and take appropriate decision

before S.C.No.50/07 is listed for trial.

3. With the above observations, after considering the report

dated 29/9/2008 submitted by the learned Magistrate, this Crl.M.C

is dismissed.

Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the

petitioner.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3211/08 3

The petitioner is the first accused and he faces indictment in a

prosecution for offences punishable inter alia under Section 307

read with 34 I.P.C and Section 8 of the Kerala Abkari Act. The crux

of the allegations is that when the police officials came to the

premises of the petitioner he and his wife, the co-accused allegedly

indulged in culpable overt acts against the detecting police officials.

Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed.

Cognizance has been taken. The case has been committed to the

court of Session. The case against the petitioner is pending as

S.C.No.50/07. The petitioner, in the meantime, has filed

C.M.P.No.5911/2003 alleging commission of offences punishable

inter alia under Sections 324, 354 and 506 (ii) read with 149 I.P.C.

The accused in that complaint are police officials who were

allegedly present in the party which detected the crime under the

Kerala Abkari Act. In that complaint,C.M.P.No.5911/2003, orders

under Section 203/204 Cr.P.C have not been passed so far. The

matter is dragging on. In these circumstances, the petitioner

apprehends that the trial in S.C.No.50/07 may be taken up even

before an order under Section 203/204 Cr.P.C is passed in the

private complaint filed by him. If cognizance is taken, it will be

necessary that the two cases are heard and disposed of by the same

court reckoning the allegations to be in the nature of allegations

and counter allegations.

Crl.M.C.No.3211/08 4

2. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that there can be a

direction that the trial (examination of witnesses) in S.C.No.50/07

pending before the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhod-I), Palakkad

should not commence until further orders. The learned Judicial First

Class Magistrate Court, Mannarkkad shall be called upon to furnish

a report about the stage of the proceedings in C.M.P.No.5911/2003.

I need only mention that I expect the learned Magistrate to

complete the enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C as expeditiously as

possible and take appropriate decision under Section 203/204

Cr.P.C. In the report to be submitted, the learned Magistrate shall

inform the court the probable time that will be required to take

such decision under Section 203/204 Cr.P.C.

3. Await report of the learned Magistrate. Call on

15/9/2008.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3211/08 5

Crl.M.C.No.3211/08 6

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.No. of 2008

ORDER

09/07/2008