IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 728 of 2009() ------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.330/2008 OF ETTUMANOOR POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ REJIMOL, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O. THOMAS, AMAL GARDEN, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT:STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ETTUMANOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== CRL.M.C. No.728 OF 2009 ===================== Dated this the 19th day of February 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed to quash Annexure 2 charge sheet, etc. The allegation against the accused is that on 28.5.2008 when the Manager of the New India Assurance Company, viz., Sri.Gopinatha Pillai parked his car on the side of the first informant's shop and while he got down from the car and was coming, the petitioner herein showered with obscene words and when he was so standing the petitioner said that she will teach him a lesson. On the basis of this, an FIR was registered and thereafter Annexure 2 charge sheet has been laid before the court. It is to quash this charge, the present petition is filed. 2. I have meticulously perused the FIR as well as the charge sheet. In both there was absolutely no recitals regarding the obscene words alleged to have been used by the petitioner. The recitals are “.......................................................................................................................... ..........................................................................................................................” Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that in the light of the settled CRL M.C.No.728/2009 -:2:- position of law, it is absolutely imperative to have the words used in order to find out whether the words alleged to be uttered are obscene in character. It is contended by her that in the light of the decision reported in Preethimon v. State of Kerala(2008(2) KLT 666) the petitioner is entitled to get Annexure 2 charge sheet quashed. The learned Judge in the said decision held that “a vague or general statement in the FIR that the accused showered obscene words is not enough to constitute an offence under Section 294(b). It is necessary to state the words uttered by the accused. The prosecution would not be justified in bringing in the evidence for the first time the words allegedly spoken to by the accused, when the same is not recorded in the First Information Statement in a case instituted upon police report”. So, the dictum laid down in the decision has to be understood as follows: It is imperative to give the words used for the reason that unless the words are there, one cannot find out whether it is obscene or not. Secondly, when the said words are not given at the first point of time, then one can shape the words in its own language and try to give evidence before court, which shall not be normally entertained. Therefore, I agree with the learned Judge and on a perusal of the materials available before me, I am convinced that materials are totally lacking to find out the obscene words as it is not extracted anywhere including the charge sheet. So this is a CRL M.C.No.728/2009 -:3:- fit case where power under Section 482 has to be invoked. Therefore the Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in S.T.No.1541 of 2008 of the Judicial I Class Magistrate Court, Ettumanoor are quashed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-