IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.L.P..No. 837 of 2009() -------------------------- CC.17/2006 of J.M.F.C.-I(FOREST OFFENCES),TPA .................... PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------- SHAJI,S/O. MATHEW, MULLAKARIYIL VEEDU, OTTALLOOR KARA, KARIMKUNNAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP SMT.K.DEEPA (PAYYANUR) RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED & STATE --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SWAPNA,W/O. PRADEEP, KALLOORTHAZHE HOUSE, ELIKULAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THANKAMMA,W/O. SOMAN, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, MANAKKAD VILLAGE,THODUPUZHA TALUK. 3. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.JOMY GEORGE FOR R1 & 2 SRI.M.J.BENNY FOR R1 & 2 SRI.SEBASTIAN THOMAS FOR R1 & 2 THIS CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.Leave Petition No.837 of 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 8 th day of October, 2009 ORDER The complainant in C.C.No.17 of 2006 on the file of the J.F.C.M-I, Thodupuzha challenges the order of acquittal dated 30.4.2009 passed by the J.F.C.M-I, Thodupuzha acquitting the two accused persons who were officials of Karimkunnam Panchayat of offences punishable under Sections 447,448 and 294(b) read with 34 IPC. 2. Admittedly the two accused persons who were officials of the Karimkunnam Panchayat had come to the newly constructed house of the petitioner for affixing the number plate on the front door. The petitioner resisted the said attempt and wanted the number plate to be affixed on the side wall. This resulted in an altercation. The petitioner thereafter prosecuted the two panchayat officials alleging that they trespassed into the petitioner's house and abused him in filthy language. On the side of the complainant, four witnesses were examined as PWs.1 to 4 including the complainant. The learned Magistrate, after Crl.Leave Petition No.837/09 2 trial acquitted the accused. The Magistrate was not inclined to accept the testimony of PWs.1 to 4 as true. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. The findings recorded by the learned Magistrate are pure findings of fact based on a careful evaluation of the oral evidence. The trial court which had the unique advantage of seeing the witnesses and assessing their credibility was not inclined to asses the testimony as true and convinced. This Court sitting in appeal will be loathe to interfere with such findings. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant leave to appeal. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Dated this the 8 th day of October, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj