IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4892 of 2010() ------------------------------------ (FIR NO.1034/2010 DATED 6/11/2010 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- PRATHYUMNAN, HEAD CONSTABLE, HAV.6563, S.A.P.CAMP, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.VIMALAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS/DEFACT-COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SHAJI.K., CF-2227, H.Q.COMPANY, S.A.P.CAMP, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE COMMANDENT, SPECIAL ARMED POLICE, PEROORKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2, R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4892 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 31st day of January, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.1034 of 2010 of Peroorkada Police Station for offences punishable under Sec. 294 (b), 325 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code. Case was registered on the complaint of respondent No.3. It is contended by learned counsel that petitioner is exonerated in the departmental enquiry and that no offence is made out against petitioner. According to the learned counsel, petitioner was suspended from service while Annexure-7 would show that person accused of more serious offences was not suspended. 2. Petitioner is the Head Constable of S.A.P Camp, Thiruvananthapuram. Respondent No.3 is an employee of that camp. According to respondent No.3, he was summoned to the office of the petitioner on 01.11.2010 and petitioner used abusive words against him. Petitioner tried to assault him with a chair. Thereafter, petitioner pushed out respondent No.3 from the office and the latter fell down and suffered fracture . Petitioner has a different version. He would say that respondent No.3 is an accused in FIR No.1034 of 2010 of Peroorkkada Police Station for causing hurt to one Narayanan Kutti who is an employee of S.A.P Camp and there was departmental proceedings against Crl.M.C.No.4892 of 2010 -: 2 :- respondent No.3. In connection with that, petitioner summoned respondent No.3 to the office on 01.11.2010 to serve two orders. Respondent No.3 came to the office on that day, created commotion, threatened petitioner and used abusive words against him. Petitioner reported that matter to the superior officer. While so, respondent No.3 made a complaint against petitioner to respondent No.4 who ordered enquiry which according to the petitioner resulted in exonerating him. It is in the meantime that police registered a case on the information given by respondent No.3. 3. The mere fact that petitioner was exonerated in the departmental enquiry if any is not a ground to quash proceedings against him. It is held so in Ayoob Ismail Vs. State of Keraala (2008(4) KLT 977). On hearing learned Public Prosecutor it is revealed that the matter is under investigation. I am not persuaded to think that in the light of the allegations made by respondent No.3, the FIR against petitioner and proceedings against him are to be quashed. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case fails. It is dismissed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-