IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3442 of 2008() ------------------------------ CP.49/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AMABALAPUZHA .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1, 3 AND 4 --------------------------------------- 1. SUBHASH,S/O. BHASKARAN, KUNHIYIL VEEDU, WARD NO.13, PURAKKAD PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. USHA, D/O. RAGHAVAN, KUNHIYIL VEEDU, WARD NO. 13, PURAKKADU PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. SUMI, D/O. RAGHAVAN, KUNHIYIL VEEDU, WARD NO.13, PURAKKAD PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ................................................. Crl.R.P. No. 3442 of 2008 ................................................ Dated, this the 19th day of February, 2009. O R D E R The revision petitioners are accused Nos. 1,3 and 4 in Crime No. 380 of 2006 of Ambalappuzha Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 313, 498 A and 420 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. Those were the offences alleged in the private complaint filed before the Magistrate and made over to the police under Sec. 156 (3) Cr.P.C. However, the police after investigation, filed a final report only for offences punishable under Sections 498 A and 420 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. While perusing the prosecution records the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that apart from the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 420 I.P.C. an offence punishable under Sec. 313 I.P.C. was also made out. Accordingly, C.C. No. 867 of 2007 was converted into C.P. 49 of 2008 and the learned Magistrate as per the impugned Crl.R.P. No. 3442 of 2008 -:2:- order dated 23-6-2008 committed the case to the Court of Sessions under Sec. 209 Cr.P.C. by recourse to Sec. 323 Cr.P.C. It is said order which is assailed in this Revision. 2. A3 is the father of A1 and A4. A2 the wife of A3 died subsequently. The complainant is the wife of A1. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners would contend that the offence punishable under Sec. 313 I.P.C. was consciously deleted by the police after investigation and the materials produced along with the final report do not justify the inclusion of Sec. 313 I.P.C. so as to commit the case to the court of Session. 4. This Court sitting in revision under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401Cr.P.C. will be loathe to scan through the entire materials produced along with the final report to find out whether the conclusion reached by the Magistrate is right or not. The petitioners can certainly have their say before the court of Session during the preliminary hearing under Sec. 227 Cr.P.C. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, if at all, an offence of causing miscarriage is made out, it can at best fall under Sec. 312 Crl.R.P. No. 3442 of 2008 -:3:- I.P.C. which is triable by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class. This is a matter which the petitioner can canvass before the Sessions Court during the preliminary hearing under Sec. 227 Cr.P.C. If the records do not justify the offence punishable under Sec. 313 I.P.C. or if the records only disclose an offence punishable under Sec. 312 I.P.C., the Sessions Judge can on being convinced about the same proceed under Sec. 228 (1) (a) Cr.P.C. and transfer the case either to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to a Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class as the case may be. Leaving open the above option to the revision petitioners, this revision is dismissed. Dated this the 19th day of February, 2009. V.Ramkumar, Judge. ani/