IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 14TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 23RD BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3771 of 2010() ------------------------ ST.384/2010 OF JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I, PEERUMEDU ...................................................... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1,3,8,9 AND 16 : --------------------------------------------------------- 1. LISSY JOSEPH, OOTHUPARAMBIL VEEDU, MURINJAPUZHA.P.O., PEERMADE VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SUJA MOHANAN, CHETTUKAVINGAL VEEDU, MURINJAPUZHA.P.O., PEERMADE VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. SUJATHA ARJUNAN, EDAPPATTU VEEDU, MURINJAPUZHA.P.O., PEERMADE VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. UMAYAMMA RAJENDRAN, PUTHUR VEEDU, MURINJAPUZHA.P.O., PEERMADE VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 5. JESSY MATHEW, W/O. BIJU MATHEW, PUTHENPURAKKAL VEEDU, MURINJAPUZHA.P.O., PEERMADE VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.N.M.JAMES SRI.S.JIJI RESPONDENTS / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE : --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.V.REGHUNATHAN, THUNDIL VEEDU, MURINJAPUZHA.P.O., PEERMADE VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN – 685 532. 2. STATE OF KRALA, REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 3771 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 14th day of September,2010 ORDER Petitioners the accused in S.T.384/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Peermade taken cognizance for the offence under sections 500 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A1 complaint. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that there was no publication of the alleged defamatory statement as it was given to the police officials and in any case petitioners are entitled to the protection of Eighth Exception to Section 500 of Indian Penal Code. 2. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and going through Annexure A1, I find no reason to quash the Crl.M.C.3771/2010 2 cognizance taken as sought for. Petitioners are at liberty to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Magistrate. With that liberty, petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006