IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2849 of 2008()
1. BINO THOMAS, S/O.LATE THOMAS,
... Petitioner
2. SAJU MATHEW,
3. BINDHU SAJU,
4. AMMUKUTTY THOMAS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :13/11/2008
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
...........................................
CRL.R.P.NO. 2849 OF 2008
............................................
DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008
ORDER
Revision petitioners are the accused in C.C.31 of 2006 on
the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Aluva. Revision
petition is filed challenging the order passed by learned
Magistrate in CMP 2327 of 2007, an application filed by them to
discharge them under Section 239 of Code of Criminal
Procedure.
2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners was heard.
The argument of the learned counsel is that there is no material
before the court to prima facie show that petitioners committed
the offence under Section 451, 341, 323 and 498A read with 34
IPC and even though prosecution has a case that revision
petitioner has also committed an offence under Section 324 IPC
and learned Magistrate found that there is no prima facie case of
commission of offence under Section 324 IPC, at least they
should have been discharged for the offence under Section 324
IPC.
3. On hearing the learned counsel and going through the
order passed by learned Magistrate, I do not find any reason to
CRRP 2849/2008 2
interfere with the order. When learned Magistrate found that the
materials produced before the court show only the commission of
an offence under Section 451, 341, 323 and 498A read with 34
IPC, it is not necessary to pass an order of discharge in respect
of the offence under Section 324 IPC. In such a case, charge
need be framed only for the offences which are prima facie
shown. At the stage of framing charge, learned Magistrate shall
go through the materials and decide on the materials produced
whether the materials so produced, if accepted unrebutted, will
prima facie show the offences. Learned Magistrate is competent
to go through the statements recorded under Section 161, at
that stage. The order shows that on the materials, learned
Magistrate was satisfied that it cannot be said there is no
material to connect petitioners with the offences read with
Section 34 IPC.
In such circumstances, petition is dismissed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE
lgk/-