High Court Kerala High Court

Philiphose Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2007

Kerala High Court
Philiphose Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl Rev Pet No. 30 of 2007(C)


1. PHILIPHOSE ABRAHAM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. VARGHESE NINAN, S/O.M.V. NINAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU

 Dated :23/02/2007

 O R D E R
                             K.R.UDAYABHANU, J

                        ---------------------------------------------

                            CRL.R.P.No.30 of 2007

                         ---------------------------------------------

             Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2007




                                        ORDER

Revision petitioner who is the accused police officer has

sought for setting aside the order of the court below in

Crl.M.P.No. 5484/06 in C.C.133/01 with respect to the offence

under Sections 324, 326 and 506 of IPC. The petitioner/accused

had applied for discharge vide Section 245(2) r/w 197 of Code of

criminal Procedure. The trial court dismissed the application on

the ground that the predecessor of the JFCM had earlier

considered the same question as to the requirement sanction

under Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code and held that

sanction is not required as assaulting a person while on duty is

not part of official duty.

2. It is pointed out that the above order was issued at the

pre-cognizance stage and that the court below ought to have

considered the contention of the petitioner/accused. I find that

at that time revision petitioner was not in the picture at all.

Hence, the court below ought to have considered the contentions

CRRP30/2007 Page numbers

of the revision petitioner on merits and disposed of the matter

instead of dismissing the application relying on the observation

of the court at pre-cognizance stage.

2. In the circumstances, I am inclined to set aside the

order of the court below. The matter is remitted back to the trial

court. J.F.C.M., Thiruvalla is directed to consider the

contentions of the revision petitioner and dispose of the

discharge application on merits.

The Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of as above.






                                                         K.R.UDAYABHANU,

                                                                      JUDGE


csl


CRRP30/2007                            Page numbers





                                                        K.R.UDAYABHANU, J













                                                               Crl.R.P.No.899 of 2001


                                                               ORDER


CRRP30/2007    Page numbers













                                       15th February, 2007




CRRP30/2007    Page numbers