IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3560 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31/10/2008 IN CRL. MP 2413/08 IN CC.230/2006 OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY .................... REVN. PETITIONER/PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------------------------------- T.P.PAVITHRAN,S/O.DAMODHARAN, MEMBER, KUTHUPARAMBA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, MURIYAD P.O.,KUTHUPARAMBA. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED AND STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. R.K.RAGHAVAN, SON OF ANDI, PANUNDA, P.O.PACHAPOYIKA, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL. RP.3560/2008 ORDER ON CRL.M.A. NO.11030/2008 IN CRL. RP.NO.3560/2008 DISMISSED 06/11/2008. SD/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.R.P. NO. 3560 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is filed under section 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the complainant in C.C.230 of 2006 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery challenging the order passed by the learned Magistrate in Crl.M.P.2413 of 2008. That petition was filed by the revision petitioner to implead and try additional accused contending that they also committed the offences under section 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code. Learned Magistrate dismissed the application holding that there is no evidence to show that the persons alleged to have involved in the offence appears to have committed the offence to proceed against under section 319 of Cr.P.C. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel is that when the complaint was originally filed, petitioner was not aware that the additional persons, who are sought to be impleaded as additional accused committed the offence and only at the time of evidence CRRP3560/08 2 it was brought to the notice of the petitioner and hence the application is filed and learned Magistrate should have proceeded against them as provided under section 319 of Code of Criminal Procedure and therefore the impugned order is to be set aside. 4. Section 319 of Code of Criminal Procedure enables the Magistrate to proceed against other persons who are not before the Court as an accused, if those persons appear to have committed the offence on the evidence. Under sub section (1) of section 319 where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being accused has committed an offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed. The power provided under sub section (1) could be invoked by the Magistrate in the course of trial if on the evidence it appears to the Magistrate that any such person, not being an accused, has committed the offence. Learned Magistrate on the evidence found that apart from the statement of the petitioner, which is not supported by any other evidence, CRRP3560/08 3 it does not appear that the persons sought to be impleaded as accused committed the offence. In such circumstances I find no illegality or irregularity in the order passed by learned Magistrate in Crl.M.A. 11030 of 2008. Revision is dismissed. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE Okb/-