IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1004 of 2010() ------------------------ CP.56/2001 of JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALUVA .................. PETITIONER – ACCUSED : ----------------------------------- SUKUMARAN KARTHA, SON OF NARAYANAN KARTHA, PULIKKILLATHU USHA NIVAS, MOOLEPPADAM-VAZHAKKALA ROAD, CHERUMUTTAPPUZHA, VAZHAKKALA. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENT - COMPLAINANT AND STATE : -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MANMADHAN KARTHA, SON OF NARAYANAN KARTHA, PULIKKILLATHU RAHUL NIVAS CHEMBUMUKKU ROAD, KADAMAKKERY, CHERUMUTTAPPUZHA, VAZHAKKALA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31. R1 BY ADV. SMT.N.N.GIRIJA R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.1004 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 16th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the accused in C.P.56/2001 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Aluva filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-IV order, by which learned Magistrate has committed the case to the Sessions Court as it appeared to the learned Magistrate that the case is to be tried by the Sessions Court as S.C.284/2000 pending before Additional Sessions Court, North Paravur is the main case and it is the counter case. Case of the petitioner is that C.P.56/2001 is not the counter case of S.C.284/2000 and therefore, learned Magistrate should Crmc 1004/10 2 not have committed the case to the Sessions Court. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and first respondent were heard. 3. Offences involved in C.P.56/2001 are not exclusively triable by the Sessions Court. Judicial First Class Magistrate had earlier transferred the case to the Sessions Court. It was challenged before this Court in Crl.M.C.868/2002. As per order dated 16/12/2008 the order transferring the case was quashed by this court, holding that the Magistrate has no power to transfer the case. It is thereafter Annexure-IV order was passed committing the case to the Sessions Court, under Section 323 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. Section 323 of Code of Criminal Procedure enables a Magistrate to commit a case Crmc 1004/10 3 to the Sessions Court, even though the offences are not exclusively triable by the Sessions Court. Section 323 provides that if, in any inquiry into an offence or a trial before a Magistrate, it appears to him at any stage of the proceedings before signing the judgment that case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Session, he shall commit it to that Court under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned Magistrate finding that the case is to be tried by the same Sessions Court which is trying S.C.284/2000, invoking the power under Section 323 of Code of Criminal Procedure passed Annexure-IV order. Petitioner made available Annexure-V final report taken cognizance in S.C.284/2000 as well as Annexure- I private complaint filed by the first respondent, taken cognizance as C.P.56/2001. Crmc 1004/10 4 Though learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently argued that both cases are in respect of different and independent incidents and therefore, one is not the counter case of the other on going through the private complaint as well as final report in the other case the finding of the learned Magistrate in Annexure-IV order that C.P.56/2001 is a case to be tried by the same judge, who is trying S.C.284/2000 is perfectly legal and warrants no interference. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.