IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1702 of 2005()
1. RAJAN.T.M. AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.V.T.THOMAS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. R.LEKSHMI, S.T.REDDIAR & SONS,
3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA
For Petitioner :SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW
For Respondent :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.)
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :08/08/2008
O R D E R
M.C.HARI RANI, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.No.1702 OF 2005
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF AUGUST, 2008
O R D E R
This petition is filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. with the
prayer to quash Annexures 2 to 4 and all other proceedings in
C.C.No.1331/04 pending on the file of the Court of Judicial First
Class Magistrate,-I, Alappuzha.
2. The petitioner herein is the 3rd accused in
C.C.No.1331/04. The case has been proceeded against the
petitioner and two other accused on the basis of the complaint filed
under section 200 of Cr.P.C. copy of which is produced as Annexure
2. It is alleged in this petition that the allegation in Annexure 2 that
the petitioner committed an offence under section 427 read with
section 34 of IPC is a non-cognizable offence and that the
Magistrate has referred that complaint under section 156(3) of
Cr.P.C. to the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter which
is illegal and that the Magistrate has no power to order the
investigation under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. in respect of a non-
cognizable offence. Thus, according to the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the learned Magistrate has mechanically forwarded
Annexure 2 complaint to the Sub Inspector of Police, Alappuzha
CRL.M.C.NO.1702/05 -2-
South Police Station without applying the mind and ignoring the fact that
he has no power to do so. Annexure 3 is the copy of the FIR in Crime
No.41/04 registered under sections 427 and 34 of IPC against the
petitioner as the 3rd accused and two other accused. Annexure 4 is the
copy of the final report filed before the Court of JFCM-I, Alappuzha
alleging offence under Sections 427 and 34 of IPC, based on which
C.C.No.1331/04 is registered by the learned Magistrate against the
petitioner and two other accused. The petitioner has approached this
Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings against him..
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
also the second respondent. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.
4. This petition is opposed by the learned counsel appearing for
the second respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing
for the second respondent that prima facie case is made out under
section 427 against the petitioner and the complaint filed by the
complainant under section 200 of Cr.P.C. was referred by the learned
Magistrate to the Sub Inspector of Police, for investigation who filed the
FIR after investigating the case under Sections 155(2) and that there is
no illegality on the part of the Magistrate in taking cognizance of the
same. Further, the complicity of the accused including the petitioner has
CRL.M.C.NO.1702/05 -3-
to be decided by the learned Magistrate after considering the facts and
evidence adduced by the parties before that court.
5. It is the settled law that section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked
by this Court only sparingly and that too to avoid abuse of process of law
and to meet the ends of justice. Copy of the FIR is produced as
Annexure 3, wherein it is mentioned by the Investigating Officer that the
complaint preferred by the second respondent herein before the
Magistrate Court as C.M.P.No.2913/03 was received by him for the
purpose of registering the case and to conduct investigation under section
156(3) Cr.P.C. and the same was investigated by him and filed the final
report Annexure -4 before the learned Magistrate. In the final report
which is attached along with Annexure-4, it is stated that the complaint of
the first witness mentioned in the FIR received by him from the court was
entered in the case register and subsequently the case was investigated
by the 5th witness and filed the FIR along with the report before the
learned Magistrate. Request was also made to order arrest of the
accused after receiving the copy of the charge. All these proceedings
done by the Investigating Officer as revealed from Annexure-4 can only
be in accordance with the procedures complied in section 155(1) to (3)
and cannot be under section 156(3) as mentioned in Annexure-3. By
CRL.M.C.NO.1702/05 -4-
simply quoting the section of law as section 156(3) in the FIR by the Sub
Inspector of Police, Alappuzha South Police Station, it cannot be
contended that the Magistrate has referred the matter in dispute which is
a non-cognizable offence under section 427 of IPC for investigation
under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The Magistrate has taken cognizance of
the offence under section 427 read with section 34 of IPC against the
petitioner and some other accused on the basis of FIR and final report,
Annexures 3 and 4. I find no illegality in the procedure and the
complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence can be decided by the
learned Magistrate on the basis of the evidence to be adduced by the
parties. There is no illegality and no interference by this Court is required
at this stage by invoking the inherent powers under section 482 of
Cr.P.C. as prayed for in this petition. Therefore, I find that there is no
merit in this petition, which is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed. The learned Magistrate is
directed to dispose of the case in accordance with law untrammeled by
the observations in this Crl.M.C.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn