Dismissed

Viswanathan Pillai v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Mar 2019Crl.MC/173/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision petition challenging the dismissal of a private complaint by the Magistrate and Session Court under Section 203 Cr.P.C. regarding alleged theft and injury within a family was dismissed as the higher courts found no prima facie case and no irregularity in the impugned orders.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Viswanathan Pillai Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015

¶6

CRRP 32/2012 of DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 23-07-2014

¶7

ORDER IN CMP 7553/2010 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, KOYILANDY DATED 02-12-2011

¶8

PETITIONER/REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶9

VISWANATHAN PILLAI, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.CHAMIKUTTY PILLAI, P.K.S.VILLA, KOTHAMANGALAM AMSOM, PANTHALAYANI DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADVS.

¶11

SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR

¶12

RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE:

¶13

1 P.K.SUNIL, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.VISWANATHAN PILLAI, SREENESH APARTMENTS, CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE - 673 017.

¶14

2 P.K.SAJITHA, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O.SURESH BANU, KELAMBATTIL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE-673 305.

¶15

3 SURESH BABU, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.UNNI PILLAI, KALAMBATTIL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE-673 305.

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015

¶17

¶18

4 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31.

¶19

BY ADVS. SRI.JOHN THITHEEMOS SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN SRI.SHYAM PADMAN SRI.S.K.SAJU

¶20

SRI. RAMESH CHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015

¶23

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner herein is the de facto complainant in C.M.P. No.7553 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandi. He assails the order dated 2.12.2011 passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing his complaint under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C., which order was confirmed by the Court of Session by order dated 23.7.2014 in Crl.R.P.No.32 of 2012.

¶26

The 1^st and 2^nd respondents are the son and daughter respectively of the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent is his son-in-law.

¶27

The petitioner lodged a complaint before the learned Magistrate on 10.12.2010 arraying the party respondents as the accused. According to the petitioner, in connection with the commission of suicide by his wife, he was roped in as an accused and was remanded. While undergoing incarceration in the Sub Jail, Koyilandi, the party respondents trespassed into his house with intent to commit theft. This was witnessed by his neighbours, Krishnan and Murali. After his release, he conducted a detailed inspection and he

¶28

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015 4

¶29

realised that a gold chain, two gold rings, cash amounting to Rs.10,000/- and the title deeds of various properties were stolen by the respondents from the safe kept in his house. Raising these allegations, a complaint was lodged before the learned Magistrate.

¶30

The sworn statement of the petitioner and two other witnesses were recorded. The learned Magistrate on a detailed evaluation of the materials, came to the conclusion that the petitioner had failed to make out a prima facie case.

¶31

The petitioner herein filed a revision petition challenging the order passed by the learned Magistrate. The learned Sessions Judge meticulously evaluated the facts and circumstances and also the evidence adduced and refused to interfere.

¶32

The above orders are under challenge in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

¶33

I have bestowed my anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the

¶34

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015

¶35

¶36

petitioner. I have gone through the materials as well.

¶37

The party respondents are none other than the children and son-in-law of the petitioners. The learned Magistrate did not find the case set up by the petitioner to be convincing. Furthermore, the witnesses who were examined to corroborate the petitioner’s version were not the persons who were named in the complaint.

¶38

Under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate is having the powers to summarily dismiss a complaint if, after considering the statement on oath of the complainant and of the witnesses, he is of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding with the case. The words “sufficient ground” mean the satisfaction that a prima facie case is made out against the accused by the evidence which is brought on record. The Magistrate can take into consideration inherent improbabilities appearing on the face of the complaint or in the evidence led by the complainant in support of the allegations. In the case on hand, the learned Magistrate has concluded that no case whatsoever has been made out against the accused, which order was confirmed by the revisional court.

¶39

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015

¶40

¶41

Having considered the entire aspects, I am of the view that the learned Magistrate was well justified in dismissing the complaint under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C. I find no irregularity, illegality or impropriety in the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate.

¶42

This revision petition will stand dismissed.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶45

IAP

¶46

Crl.MC.No. 173 of 2015

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX

¶49

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶50

ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 10/12/2010 BEFORE THE J.F.C.M.COURT-I, KOYILANDY.

¶51

ANNEXURE II A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2/12/2011 IN CMP NO.7553/2010 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-KOYILANDY.

¶52

ANNEXURE III A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23/7/2014 IN CRL.RP NO.32/2012 ON THE FILE OF SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶53

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶54

//TRUE COPY//

¶55

P.A TO JUDGE

Viswanathan Pillai v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viswanathan Pillai 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

Yahya T S Vs the State of Kerala

Johnkutty.M.v Vs State of Kerala

Sindhu Jibi Vs State of Kerala

Mejo Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Rejitha R Vs the State of Kerala

Prajin Francis Vs State of Kerala