IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3147 of 2009() ------------------------------ CMP.2393/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, PUNALUR .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): REVISION PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------- SAINUDHEEN, S/O. MOHAMMED HANEEFA, ROADVILA VEEDU, KAITHODEU NILAMEL. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. No. 3147 of 2009 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated, this the 18th day of March 2010 ORDER The revision petitioner who was the complainant in a private complaint against 4 accused persons namely Nusaifa Beevi, Salahudeen, Amina Beevi, Ishack @ Razak alleging offences punishable under Sections 494, 497 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. challenges the order dated 12-6-2008 passed by the J.f.C.M.I , Punalur dismissing the complaint under Sec. 203 after recording the sworn statement of the revision petitioner and two other witnesses and CWs 2and 3. According to the revision petitioner, the marriage between himself and Nusaifa Beevi is still subsisting and while so she married Salahudeen on 31-1-2000. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence by proceeding under Chapter 15 of Cr.P.C. and took the sworn statement of the revision petitioner and two other witnesses. Thereafter, the complaint has been dismissed under Sec. 203 Cr.P.C. by passing the following order:- “This private complaint against 4 accused persons is alleged commission of offences under Sec. 494, 497 read with Sec. 34 I.P.CC. Complainant and two witnesses examined as CW1 to 3. No document produced. On a consideration of the statement recorded Crl.R.P. No. 3147 of 2007 -:2:- under Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the complainant and witness, I am of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. None of the ingredients of offence under Secs. 494, 497 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. prima facie established for the reason stated above. i found that complainant is devoid of merit and dismissed under Sec. 203 Cr.P.C.” The order does not indicate as to why the Magistrate is of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. He should have given reasons in support of the dismissal of the complaint. Since the complaint was dismissed before issuing process to the four accused persons no notice need go to the accused persons in this Revision. The impugned order which does not give reasons in support of the dismissal of the complaint cannot be sustained, and is, accordingly set aside. C.M.P. 2393 of 2007 will stand restored to the file of the J.F.C.M. I, Punalur and shall be dealt with in accordance with law. Sd/-V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. /true copy/ P.S. to Judge Crl.R.P. No. 3147 of 2007 -:3:-