IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4244 of 2010 (E) ------------------------- ( CC.557/2009 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD) .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------- R.RAGHU, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.A.V.RAMAN, AZHILLATH HOUSE, MARUTHUKULAM, BALAL VILLAGE, KASARGODE DISTRICT. BY ADV.S SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE SMT.CISSY JAWAHAR RESPONDENT/STATE ------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. -------------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.4244 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November, 2010. O R D E R Petitioner the accused in CC.No.557 of 2009 on the file of Chief Judicial magistrate Court, Kasaragod, filed this petition to quash the proceedings contending that there is no evidence on record that the petitioner intentionally tendered false evidence and the opinion formed by the Court that petitioner committed an offence punishable under Section 193 of Indian Penal code was not based on a subjective satisfaction, but was an objective one and no preliminary enquiry was conducted. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. The sister of the petitioner was the accused in S.C No 302 of 2005 on the allegation that she caused the death of her twin daughters and thereby committed an offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal code. The crime was registered based on the first information furnished by the petitioner before the Sessions Court as PW1. He denied the statement seen in the FI statement when put to him. Learned Sessions Judge based on the evidence of PW22, the Sub Inspector of Police, who recorded the Crl.M.C No.4244 OF 2010 2 statement, found that petitioner had given false evidence. After giving notice to the petitioner and conducting an enquiry under Section 340 of code of Criminal Procedure. Annexure-A complaint was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate kasaragod, which was taken cognizance. Though learned counsel argued that learned Sessions Judge should not have filed complaint and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate should not have taken cognizance, on hearing the learned counsel, I do not find sufficient material to quash the proceedings. Petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions raised herein before the Chief Judicial Magistrate at the time of trial. Petition is disposed. Petitioner is entitled to file a complaint under section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. mns