IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3872 of 2010() ------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23/10/2010 IN CRMP 4379/2009 IN CC.6361/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 2 TO 6 ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THANKAPPAN, 12/1, THAKAMUTHU COLONY, NEAR RAGAVENDRA KALYANAMANDAPAM, POLLACHI, TAMIL NADU. 2. SULOCHANA, W/O. THANKAPPAN, 12/1, THAKAMUTHU COLONY, NEAR RAGAVENDRA KALYANAMANDAPAM, POLLACHI, TAMIL NADU. 3. JAYANTHI, D/O. THANKAPPAN, W/O. SURENDRAN, PUTHANVEEDU, NEAR NARAYANA CHIKITHSALAYAM, CHITTILANCHERI, PALAKKAD. 4. SUNDARAN, PUTHANVEEDU, NEAR NARAYANA CHIKITHSALAYAM, CHITTILANCHERI, PALAKKAD. 5. PRABHAKARAN, S/O. THANKAPPAN, 12/1, THAKAMUTHU COLONY, NEAR RAGAVENDRA KALYANAMANDAPAM, POLLACHI, TAMIL NADU. BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADV. SRI.P.M.RAFIQ SRI.UNNI SEBASTIAN KAPPEN RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. DARSHANA, D/O. M.A.MADHAVAN, 'DIMPLE', KOTTAYI, PALAKKAD. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss V. RAMKUMAR, J. .................................................... Crl. R.P. No. 3872 of 2010 ..................................................... Dated this the 21st day of December, 2010. ORDER The petitioners who were accused Nos.2 to 6 in C.C. No. 6361 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate -III, Palakkad for an offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC, challenge the order dated 23.10.2010 passed by the Magistrate dismissing their application for discharge on the ground that that court had no territorial jurisdiction to try the offence. The court below has held that that court has got territorial jurisdiction to try the offence. I am not inclined to interfere with the finding recorded by the court below. Thus, the petitioners will have to face trial. If a question of identity of the petitioners does not arise during trial, the petitioners may file an application under Section 205 Cr.P.C for personal exemption by incorporating the necessary averments. In case such a petition is filed, I am sure that the learned Magistrate will consider the same and pass appropriate orders favourably. This revision is disposed of. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) rv