IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1318 of 2009()
1. JOHNEY JOSEPH, KUDAKKASSERIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. RAJAGOPAL, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC
For Petitioner :SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
For Respondent :SRI.H.B.SHENOY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :17/07/2009
O R D E R
M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
--------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.1318 of 2009
--------------------------
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused and first respondent
the complainant in C.C.No.6/2008 on the file of
Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II,
Kottayam. Case of the first respondent in Annexure-
A complaint is that his name, as an accused person,
was included in the charge sheet after
pronouncement of the judgment in C.C.No.689/1998 by
Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kottayam and in
that case investigation was based on the
information furnished by the petitioner and
allegations in that case against the first
respondent are totally false and baseless and
petitioner and first respondent had to face trial
for offences under Sections 341, 294(b) and 506(1)
read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and
learned Magistrate, under Annexure-B judgment,
acquitted him and while the case was in progress,
CRMC 1318/09 2
first respondent had to stand in the witness dock
as an accused and it gave impression to the people
that he committed heinous and shameful crime and it
affected his reputation and spoiled his image and
in such circumstances, petitioner committed the
offence under Section 499 punishable under Section
500 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed
under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to
quash Annexure-A complaint and the proceedings
taken therunder.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and first respondent were heard.
3. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, the allegations in
Anenxure-A complaint, even if accepted in toto, do
not make out an offence under Section 499 which is
punishable under Section 500 of Indian Penal Code.
Even the entire case in Annexure-A complaint is
accepted, because of enmity and grudge, at the
instance of the petitioner, police submitted a
CRMC 1318/09 3
charge sheet roping the petitioner also as an
accused. Even though first respondent is innocent
and he has to stand as an accused for several years
and by standing in the accused dock, some people
gathered there had the impression that he is a
criminal and it affected his reputation, at best,
it can be said that case of the first respondent is
that he was maliciously prosecuted at the instance
of the petitioner. But, that does not mean that
first respondent committed an offence under Section
499 of Indian Penal Code. In the absence of an
allegation that petitioner, by words, either spoken
or intended to be read or by signs or by visible
representations made or published any imputation
concerning the first respondent, intended to harm
or knowing or having reason to believe that such
imputation will harm the reputation of the person,
petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence
under Section 499 of Indian Penal Code.
Continuation of the proceedings is clearly an abuse
CRMC 1318/09 4
of process of the Court.
Petition is, therefore, allowed. C.C.No.6/2008
on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s
Court-II, Kottayam as against the petitioner is
quashed.
17th July, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv