IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3285 of 2009() ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 09/10/2009 IN CMP 3914/09 IN CC.308/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PALA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------------- ALEX MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, CHEMBETHILVEEDU, MONIPPALLI KARA, MONIPALLI VILLAGE. BY ADV. SMT.K.V.RESHMI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT, DEFACTOR COMPLAINANT AND STATE ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE S.I.OF POLICE, KURUVILANGAD. 2. TOMY, S/O.BASSALIYOS, VELAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUMELY VILLAGE, MUTAPPILLY, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK. 3. THE C.I.OF POLICE, ETTUMANOOR. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. STRI. ALIAS M. CHERIAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/03/2010, ALONG WITH CRL. R.P. NO.3293 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. Nos.3285/2009 & Crl.R.P.No.3293 of 2009 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated, this the 8th day of March, 2010 ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the common revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent as also the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Kerala and the Circle Inspector of Police, Ettumanoor. 2. Crl.R.P. No. 3285 of 2009 arises out of C.C. No. 308 of 2004 on the file of the J.F.C.M. Pala, as per which the learned Magistrate has framaed charge against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 444, 324 and 323 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. It is the case instituted on a police report at the instance of one Tomy. The Crime No. was 74 of 2004 of Kuravilangad Police Station. 3. Crl.R.P. 3293 of 2009 arises out of C.C. No. 979 of 2001 on the file of the J.F. C.M. Pala, in which the petitioner Crl.R.P. Nos.3285/2009 & Crl.R.P.No.3293 of 2009 -:2:- stands charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 447 and 379 by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kuravilangad. The de facto complainant in that case is one Mony Cyriac. This case arise out of Crime No. 204 of 2001 of Kuravilangad Police Station. 4. In the above two cases charge-sheeted by the Kuravilangad Police, the petitioner sought a discharge by filing separate petitions. Since the learned Magistrate, after perusal of the prosecution records was satisfied that there was a prima facie case for framing charge, he refused to discharge the revision petitioner under Sec. 239 Cr.P.C. Naturally therefore , a charge will have to be framed against the revision petitioner. This Court sitting in revision will be loathe to scan the entire prosecution records and come to a different conclusion as to he triability of the petitioner on the aforesaid charge. Hence, these Revisions are dismissed. It is made clear that merely because a charge has been framed Crl.R.P. Nos.3285/2009 & Crl.R.P.No.3293 of 2009 -:3:- against the petitioner, it does not mean that he is convicted for the aforesaid offences. It is open to the petitioner to plead for an acquittal during the trial of the case. If a question of identity does not arise, it shall be open to the petitioner to apply personal exemption by filing a petition incorporating the necessary averments and in case such a petition is filed, I am sure that the learned Magistrate consider the same favourably. Dated this the 8th day of March, 2010. Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) ani. /true copy/ P.S. to Judge