IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2011 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 603 of 2011() ------------------------ SC. NO. 659/2009 of PRINCIPLE ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, THALASSERY ................................. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ 1. A.P. HARITHAN, S/O. AYADATHIL ACHUTHAN, AYADATHIL HOUSE, P.O. KADALAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. A.P. SUSHENAN, S/O. AYYADATHI ACHUTHAN, AYADATHIL HOUSE, P.O. KADALAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. P.O. SOBHA, W/O. AYYADATHI ACHUTHAN, AYADATHIL HOUSE, P.O. KADALAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KOTTYAL KRISHNAN, S/O. KUNHAMBU, KOTTYAL HOUSE, NR. MUKKIL PEEDIKA, CHIRAKKAL.P.O, KANNUR -11. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.J.MOHAMED ANZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No. 603 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this 4th day of March, 2011 ORDER Petitioners are accused in S.C. No.659 of 2009 of the Court of learned Principle Assistant Sessions Judge, Thalassery for offence punishable under Section 304B r/w. Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code. Daughter of the 1st respondent was married to Susruthan, brother of petitioners 1 and 2 on 18.02.2001. She committed suicide on 04.04.2003. On the information given by the first respondent police registered a case against the said Susruthan and after investigation submitted final report alleging commission of offences punishable under Secs. 498A and 306 IPC. First respondent was not satisfied with that final report and filed a private complaint arraying 13 persons including petitioners as accused for offence punishable under Sec.304B r/w. Sec.34 of the IPC. The sworn statement of 3 witnesses was recorded by the learned Magistrate who took cognizance of the said offence against petitioner. Learned Magistrate committed the case for trial to the Sessions Court which made over the same to the Principle Assistant Sessions Court where it is numbered as S.C No.659 of 2009. According to the learned counsel, ingredients of the offence u/s.304B of Indian Penal Code are lacking in the complaint. It is contended that even as per the allegations in Crl.M.C.No.603 of 2011 -: 2 :- the complaint, alleged demand for dowry made by petitioners was immediately after the marriage on 18.02.2001 and even as per the version of prosecution the deceased had shifted residence to her paternal home about three months after the marriage i.e. almost two years before her death. There is no allegation that in the meantime there was any harassment on the part of petitioners, at any rate, demanding dowry. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the learned Principle Assistant Sessions Judge has not so far framed charge in the case. If that be so, it is open to the petitioners to raise their contentions before learned Principle Assistant Sessions Judge while they are heard on framing of charge against them. There is no reason why this Court should interfere in the matter at this stage under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Resultantly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to raise their contentions at the time of framing charge, this petition is closed. Sd/- (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE KRK