Accused challenged prosecution for obscenity and criminal intimidation alleging false FIR to suppress hotel violations. Court found allegations of obscenity lacking lascivious intent and threats to approach authorities do not constitute criminal intimidation.
Prosecution proceedings for offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(1) IPC quashed.
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
THEHONOURABLEMR.JUSTICERAJAVIJAYARAGHAVANV
WEDNESDAY,THE19THDAYOFJULY2023/28THASHADHA,1945
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
AGAINSTTHEORDERINCCNO.379/2018OFJUDICIALMAGISTRATEOF
FIRSTCLASS,PARAPPANANGADI
PETITIONER/ACCUED:-
PRASANNA.T.K, AGED 58 YEARS W/O. RAGHAVAN KURUNGOTTU, MADHAVANI, SPINNING MILL, CHELAMBRA P O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BYADVS.
K.MOHANAKANNAN
SMT.T.V.NEEMA
RESPONDENTS/STATE & RESPONDENT :-
1STATEOFKERALA
REPRESENTEDBYPUBLICPROSECUTOR,
HIGHCOURTOFKERALA,ERNAKULAM,682031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673636.
3
PRINTU,AGED24YEARS,S/O.VELAYUDHAN,
KIZHAKKEPANAYINGALHOUSE,PULLIPARAMBU,CHELAMBRA,
MALAPPURAMDISTRICT-673634.
BY SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN, SR.PP
THISCRIMINALMISC.CASEHAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
19.07.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYPASSEDTHEFOLLOWING:
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
2
ORDER
The petitioner herein is the accused in C.C.No.379 of 2018
on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parappananagadi. In the aforesaid case, she is facing prosecution for having committed offence punishable under Sections 294(b) and 506(1) of the IPC.
3
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
permission, and action was initiated. For functioning without complying with the norms, the action was also initiated by the Pollution Control Board. The petitioner has referred to Annexure-A2 to Annexure-A7 documents to substantiate that the authorities have
called upon the hotel authorities to furnish their explanation for functioning without seeking permission. It is with a view to intimidate and to ensure that the petitioner is cowed down that a false complaint was lodged, and the instant crime was got registered.
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
4
be in a sense lascivious or it must appeal to the prurient sense or must be of such a nature to deprave and corrupt persons. This Court has held that even if the words are extremely unparliamentary, unprintable, and abusive in nature, so long as the words in question are not capable of arousing sexual thoughts in the minds of the hearers and do not involve lascivious elements arousing sexual thoughts or feelings or the words does not have the effect of depriving persons and defiling morals by sex appeal or lustful desires, it cannot be brought within the broad contours of the penal provisions as contained in Section 294(b) of the IPC. Having gone through the abusive words allegedly used by the petitioner herein, I do not think that the offense under Section 294(b) would be attracted.
IPC. The Section reads as follows:
"503. Criminal intimidation.-- Whoever threatens another with any injury to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of any one in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits criminal intimidation."
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
5
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
6
of the Court, the chances of ultimate conviction is bleak and no useful purpose
is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue, the Court
may quash the proceeding even though it may be at a preliminary stage.
through the records, the specific allegation against the petitioner herein is that
she had verbed abuses and also threatened the hotel employee.
the offence is attracted, and its proceedings will stand quashed.
This petition is allowed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE
SMA
CRL.MCNO.1652OF2020
7
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1652/2020
PETITIONER ANNEXURES :-
ANNEXUREA1TRUECOPYOFTHECOMMUNICATIONSENTBYTHE
PANCHAYATHDATED13.10.2015.
ANNEXUREA2TRUECOPYOFTHEREPRESENTATIONSUBMITTEDBY
THEPETITIONERBEFORETHEPANCHAYATHWITH
COPYOFOTHERSDATED5.7.2017.
ANNEXUREA3TRUECOPYOFTHECOMMUNICATIONDATED
26.07.2017.
ANNEXUREA4TRUECOPYOFTHEREPRESENTATIONDATED
30.10.2017BEFORETHEPOLLUTIONCONTROL
BOARD,
ANNEXUREA5TRUECOPYOFTHEREPRESENTATIONSUBMITTEDBY
THEPETITIONERBEFORETHEDEPUTYDIRECTOROF
PANCHAYATHDATED18.1.2018.
ANNEXUREA6TRUECOPYOFTHECOMMUNICATIONSENTBYTHE
PCBTOTHEMANAGEROFTHEHOTELDATED
27.01.2018.
ANNEXUREA7TRUECOPYOFTHENOTICENO.1/2018ISSUEDBY
THEHEALTHINSPECTOR,PRIMARYHEALTHCENTRE
CHELAMBRA.
ANNEXUREA8TRUECOPYOFTHEFIRINCRIMENO.77/2018OF
THENHIPALAMPOLICESTATION.
ANNEXUREA9TRUECOPYOFTHEFINALREPORTINCRIMENO.
77/2018OFTHENJIPALAMPOLICESTATIONWITH
ANNEXURES.
ANNEXUREA10TRUECOPYOFTHEMEDICALREPORTISSUEDBY
THEBABYMEMORIALHOSPITALON11.02.2017.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the allegedly abusive words used by the petitioner were obscene enough to attract Section 294(b) of the IPC.
Whether a threat to approach higher authorities for violation of administrative norms amounts to criminal intimidation under Section 503 IPC.
Whether the prima facie evidence establishes an offence justifying the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Latheef v. State of KeralaExplained¶27
Latheef v. State of Kerala [2014 (2) KLT 987]
P.T.Chacko v. Nainan ChackoExplained¶27
P.T.Chacko v. Nainan Chacko [1967 KLT 799]
Sangeetha Lakshmana v. State of KeralaExplained¶27
Sangeetha Lakshmana v. State of Kerala [2008 (1) KHC 812]
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Prasanna.T.K
State of Kerala
The Station House Officer, Thenhipalam Police Station
Printu
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court