The High Court of Kerala dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered suo motu against the Managing Director of Divine Medical Centre for offences under Sections 143, 147, 149, and 151 of the Indian Penal Code.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012/19TH SRAVANA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 2297 of 2012 ()
(CRIME NO. 221/2012 OF WADAKANCHEY POLICE STATION)
PETITIONER(S)/1ST ACCUSED:
M.K.ASAFALI MANAGING DIRECTOR, DIVINE MEDICAL CENTRE LTD. WADAKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT RESIDING AT HAFSA MAHAL, ENKAKAD POST THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.BHASKARAN
SRI.V.K.NANDAKUMARAN SMT.MAJIDA.S SMT.VANI HARIHARAN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE WADAKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R. RANJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 2297 of 2012 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 25883 OF 2011(I) OF THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 221/2012 DATED 14.03.2012 OF WADAKANCHERY POLICE STATION.
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
dlk
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J
Crl.M.C.2297 of 2012
Dated this the 10th day of August, 2012
O R D E R
Petitioner is the first accused in crime No.221/2012 of Wadakanchery Police station. Petitioner is stated to be the Managing Director of a hospital, namely, Divine Medical Centre, Ottupara, a Public Limited Company. Disputes between the Managing Director and the share holders arose, and that led to registration of a crime case as Crime No.789/2011, in which the petitioner/Managing Director is the de facto complainant. Occurrence involved in that case is stated to have occurred on 16.09.2011. That case was registered against some shareholders on a complaint made by the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 463, 467, 477, 408, 420, 500 and 108 of the Indian Penal Code. Civil disputes are pending between the Managing Director and the shareholders. While so, over the death of a patient in the hospital, allegedly on account of negligence of hospital authorities/doctors, some persons after criminal trespass to hospital committed mischief. In respect of
Crl.M.C.2297 of 2012
2
that incident another crime was registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 506 (2) and 227 read with 149 of Indian Penal Code. When such state of affairs prevailed, police getting information that some untoward incident was likely to occur in hospital compound rushed to the spot. They found petitioner/Managing Director with some other persons in the conference hall of the hospital, and, it appeared, to the Sub Inspector of Police that their presence was as members of unlawful assembly with common object to commit rioting in hospital premises. Petitioner and others, who were present, were arrested and taken to police station, from where the petitioner was released on bail and others arrested were produced before the Magistrate, who were then enlarged on bail. Crime registered suo motu by the police over the aforesaid incident for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149 and 151 of the Indian penal Code is sought to be quashed invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court by the petitioner filing the above petition.
Crl.M.C.2297 of 2012
3
Statement, suo motu statement of the Sub Inspector of Police, does not spell out any of the essential ingredients to satisfy that the petitioner and others present constituted an unlawful assembly as contemplated under Section 141 of I.P.C. or of any other offences, for registering the crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no case of commission of any act by anyone in the group, which is imputed as an unlawful assembly. What is stated in the statement of the Sub Inspector is that on reaching the spot he found a group of persons including the petitioner with intend to cause rioting. That statement would not suffice to hold that the assembly was unlawful nor that the members thereof had a common object which was unlawful, to constitute the offence under Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code, is the further submission.
Crl.M.C.2297 of 2012
4
object or otherwise, are all matters which can be decided only by the investigating agency in the crime registered. This Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, at this stage, solely on the basis of one or other wording used in the statement of the police officer, on which the crime was suo motu registered, cannot determine that issue. In case if a final report is filed indicting the petitioner of any offence imputed under the F.I.R. or for any other offence, it is open to him to impeach its correctness taking appropriate proceedings under law, if he has sustainable grounds to do so.
Subject to the observations made above, petition is dismissed.
Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,JUDGE.
dlk
M.K.Asafali
State of Kerala
S.S.Satheesachandan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
