Disposed

Prahladan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2014Crl.MC/1218/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by an accused constable seeking directions to dispose of his discharge petition (CMP No. 230/14) filed under Section 245(2) CrPC, alleging violation of Section 197 CrPC requirements. The court directed the lower court to decide it within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Attingal, to dispose of C.M.P. No. 230/14 within two months after hearing counsel for both petitioner and complainant.

Prahladan Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/20TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1218 of 2014 ()

¶6

CC.NO. 415/2007 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -II,ATTINGAL

¶7

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

PRAHLADAN, POLICE CONSTABLE 9783, POLICE STATION VENJARAMOODU.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031

¶12

2. ANILKUMAR,

¶13

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE STATION, VENJARAMOODU,

¶14

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 501.

¶15

3. SALIM, PRATHIBA,

¶16

NELLINADU VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK,

¶17

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 006

¶18

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S.HYMA

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶20

ON 11-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

sts

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 1218 of 2014 ()

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶25

ANNEX-A1. THE TRUE COPY OF CC NO.415/2007 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ATTINGAL.

¶26

ANNEX-A2. THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ATTINGAL.

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

K. Ramakrishnan, J.

¶33

============================== Crl.M.C.No.1218 of 2014

¶34

============================== Dated this, the 11^th day of March, 2014.

¶35

O R D E R

¶36

This is an application filed by the petitioner who is the accused in C.C.No.415/07 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court No-II, Attingal, to give direction to the learned magistrate to dispose of Annexure 2 petition filed by him under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶37

It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is

¶38

shown as second accused in C.C.No.415/07 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate No-II, Attingal, alleging offences under Sections.323, 324, 342 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. It was originated on the basis of a private complaint filed by the third respondent which after enquiry was taken on file by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court No-II, Attingal, as C.C.No.415/07. The petitioner entered appearance and filed Annexure A2 petition for discharge under Section 245 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure as the case was taken on file

¶39

without sanction from the Government as against the petitioner which according to the petitioner is not proper. But, the learned magistrate has not considered that application and

¶40

Crl.M.C.No.1218 of 2014 : 2 :

¶41

it is now posted to 06.03.2014 for evidence. So, without getting a direction from this court, the magistrate will not dispose of the application. Hence the petitioner filed this petition seeking the following relief:

¶42

“To quash Annexure A1 and allow this Crl.M.C. In the interest of justice.”

¶43

Considering the nature of allegation made in the petition, a report has been called for from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court No-II Attingal, regarding the allegations in the petition and the learned magistrate has sent a report which reads as follows:

¶44

“ CC.415/07 pending before this court is a private complaint taken to file for the offence punishable U/s.323, 324, 342 r/w.34 IPC. The then Sub Inspector of Police and one Police Constable attached to Venjaramoodu Police Station are the accused. The second accused appeared before court and enlarged on bail on 16.10.2008. The first accused applied through counsel from 12.09.2007. He did not appear before court and not taken bail till 24.1.2014. My predecessor started evidences u/s.244 Cr.PC, without appearing the first accused.

¶45

In spite of repeated directions dated 27.11.2013, 21.12.2013 and 9.1.2014 the first accused did not appear before court. On 9.1.2014, NBW ordered against first accused. On 24.1.2014, first accused appeared before court with two sureties. The sureties produced only pay slips. Hence the court insisted cash security. On furnishing case security, bail granted.

¶46

Crl.M.C.No.1218 of 2014 : 3 :

¶47

On 16.1.2014, the defence counsel, Adv.Sri.Chirayinkeezhu Shaji for accused 1 and 2, filed a petition U/s.245(2) Cr.PC to discharge the complaint as CMP.230/14. This was posted for filing objection to 18.1.2014.

¶48

On 18.1.2014, the concerned counsel for the accused is absent and posted for objection to 24.1.2014. On 24.1.2014, the accused were present. One Adv.Sri.Sasikumar is represented on behalf of Adv.Sri.Chirayinkeezh Shaji and seek time. Hence, the petition is posted for hearing and objection to 6.3.2014.”

¶49

Considering the nature of relief claimed in the petition, this court felt that on the basis of the report of the learned magistrate, this court can dispose of the petition at the admission stage itself after hearing the Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor dispensing with notice to the third respondent.

¶50

The only allegation made in the petition by the petitioner is that, being a public servant and he being included as an accused without sanction under Section 197 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the court below should not have taken cognizance of the case at all and he want to agitate that aspect as a preliminary point before the learned magistrate and he filed Annexure A2 petition for that purpose, but, that was not considered by the court below and it was posted for evidence

¶51

Crl.M.C.No.1218 of 2014 : 4 :

¶52

of the complainant under Section 244 of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is seen from the report that the petitioner had filed C.M.P.No.230/14 seeking discharge under Section 245(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure and that was posted for objection and hearing, because, without hearing the complainant, no orders could be passed in that application as he is the prosecutor of the complainant before the lower court. So, considering the circumstances this court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows:

¶53

The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, No-II, Attingal, is directed to dispose of C.M.P.No.230/14 pending before that court as expeditiously as possible at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of this order after hearing the Counsel for the petitioner and also the Counsel for the complainant in accordance with law.

¶54

Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately .

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

K.Ramakrishnan, Judge.

¶57

¶58

[True copy]

¶59

P.A to Judge

Prahladan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prahladan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E. Abdul Jaleel Vs the Station House Officer

Baskaran Vs State of Kerala

Divyanatha Shetty Vs the State of Kerala

Kallikunnu Jishi Vs the State of Kerala

Gireesh Kumar T. Vs State of Kerala

Eashy v J @ Dasan Vs State of Kerala