IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 27TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4481 of 2005(A) ------------------------- ST.605/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS II, PEERUMEDU .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ---------------------- BIJUMON, S/O.KUNJAPPAN, WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, SPECIAL CELL, PONOTH ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM-17. BY ADV. MR.G.HARIHARAN RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT/STATE: -------------------------------- 1. VIJAYAN, S/O.SUBRAMANIYAN, KONIMARA, ESTATE LAYAM, PERIYAR VILLAGE, PEERUMADE TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.AMJAD ALI FOR R2. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN FOR R1 SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No. 4481 of 2005(A) ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.16031/2005 IN CRL.M.C.NO.4481/2005 DISMISSED. 16.02.2009 SD/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE --------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4481 of 2005 --------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2009 O R D E R The petitioner is an indictee in S.T.No.605 of 2004 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu. The allegation is that he has committed offences under Sections 323, 324, 294(b) and 506(2) of the IPC. The learned Magistrate on a private complaint by the 1st respondent took cognizance only for the offence under Section 323 of IPC. Thereafter, petitioner was issued with summons. 2. The petitioner contends that he has been falsely implicated in the case and it is in retaliation of his action in not yielding to the demand of the 1st respondent in relation to another incident. According to him, earlier, a bus belonging to the Kondoty Group of Bus Services driven by the 1st respondent met with an accident. The said vehicle driven by the 1st respondent hit against a KSRTC bus causing injury to six passengers and consequently, the petitioner who was the then Sub Inspector of Police at Kumili Police Station registered crime Crl.M.C.No.4481 of 2005 2 No.274/2003 of Kumily Police Station against the 1st respondent. The said case was numbered as S.T.146/2004 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu and the 1st respondent herein pleaded guilty in that case. In fact, the 1st respondent had requested the petitioner to implicate the KSRTC driver as well in the said case and he had refused the said request. According to the petitioner it was only on account of the same that Annexure - II private complaint has been filed against him by the 1st respondent. The veracity or otherwise of the said contentions need not be and cannot be gone in to in this case. 3. The petitioner raises another important question relating want of sanction. According to him, no sanction was obtained under Section 197 of Code of Criminal Procedure for prosecuting him. He contends that he being a public servant and the offence alleged to have been committed while acting in discharge of his official duties he is having the statutory protection. No court shall take cognizance in such circumstances, he further contends. It is in these circumstances, that he approached this Court with the prayer to direct the Judicial First Class Magistrate , Peerumedu to consider the Crl.M.C.No.4481 of 2005 3 question of want of sanction required under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before proceeding further in connection with S.T.No.605/2004 on the files of the said court. 4. The question whether sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is required for prosecuting the petitioner arising out of the circumstances in Annexure-II can be effectively considered only on obtaining the entire factual matrix. Then only it could be ascertained and considered by the trial court at the appropriate stage. It be so, it is only just and proper to direct the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu to consider the question of want of sanction required under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the appropriate stage in S.T.No.605/2004. Accordingly, the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu is directed to consider the question of want of sanction required under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for prosecuting the petitioner in S.T.No.605/2004 pending before it. If objection in this regard is raised by the petitioner herein within one month from today, the question, as aforesaid, shall be considered by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peerumedu and in case the petitioner fails to Crl.M.C.No.4481 of 2005 4 do so within the said period, the court shall proceed with the case further in accordance with law. Crl.M.C. is disposed of with the above direction. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. bkn/-