IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4733 of 2010()
1. P.A.HARIDASAN,HARINANDANAM HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
2. K.UMA DEVI,SABANI,NEAR SIVA TEMPLE,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.B.PRAJITH
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :09/02/2011
O R D E R
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.
--------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.4733 of 2010
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of February, 2011.
ORDER
Petitioner is accused No.1 in C.C.No.1791 of 2008 of the court of learned
Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thrissur arising from the final report in Crime
No.327 of 2008 of Thrissur Town West Police Station for offences punishable
under Sections 294(b) and 509 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was based
on a complaint (Annexure-AI) preferred by respondent No.2, manager of
Marikkar Motors, Thrissur alleging that petitioner came to the office of
respondent No.2 (allegedly on 30.07.2008) and introduced himself as Circle
Inspector of Police, made obscene calls and sent obscene SMS to the mobile
phone of respondent No.2. Police after investigation submitted Annexure-AIII,
final report. Petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings claiming that on
30.07.2008 he was on duty in his office as revealed by Annexures-AV to AVII
and that Annexure-AIV would show that on 30.07.2008 there was no call to the
mobile phone of respondent No.2 from the mobile phone of petitioner.
2. What is raised before me is a defence which petitioner may set up
in the course of trial. Whether those documents can be relied or that the case of
prosecution could be accepted are all matters which the trial court has to
decide. Based on a plea of defence which petitioner may successfully raise
during trial of the case, proceedings cannot be quashed.
Crl.MC No.4733/2010
2
3. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner may be granted
exemption from personal appearance. I make it clear that it is open to the
petitioner to make appropriate application before the learned Magistrate and if
any such application is filed learned Magistrate shall consider the request having
regard to the contentions raised and also regarding the necessity for
identification of the accused, if any.
Petition is disposed of as above.
THOMAS P.JOSEPH,
Judge.
cks
