IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2009 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1186 of 2009(E) ------------------------------------- CC.NO.918/2007 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I , THODUPUZHA/ .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NOS.1, 10, 25,26,29,31 & 33: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THOMAS JOSEPH,AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, VATTAIKKAT HOUSE, PENAMKODE BHAGAM, THENNATHUR KARA, KODIKULAM VILLAGE,. 2. ANIL P.PAVITHRAN, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.PAVITHRAN, PONNAKERIYIL HOUSE, THENNANTHUR KARA, CHENNAMKODE, KODIKULAM VILLAGE. 3. K.P.ULAHANNAN,AGED 55 YEARS, KATTAMKOTTIL HOUSE, THENNATHUR KARA, CHENNAMKODE, KODIKULAM VILLAGE. 4. MONCY JAISON, AGED 28 YEARS, VATTAKKAT HOUSE, THENNANTHUR KARA, CHENNAMKODE,KODIKULAM VILLAGE. 5. REMI GEORGE,AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.GEORGE, NEERAMPUZHA HOUSE, THENNANTHUR KARA, CHENNAMKODE, KODIKULAM VILLAGE. 6. K.J.PAUL, AGED 55 YEARS,KOKKANDATHIL HOUSE, THENNANTHUR KARA, CHENNAMKODE,KODIKULAM VILLAGE. 7. JOSEPH JOSEPH @ JOSEPH P.J. S/O.JOSEPH, PANACHINAKKAL HOUSE, THENNANTHUR KARA, CHENNAMKODE, KODIKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. MR.VIJAYAN MANNALY, MR.T.V.GEORGE, MR.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL). CRL.M.C. NO. 1186/2009-E: RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- 1. CHERIACHAN, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.VARKEY, THENNAMKODE, KODIKULAM VILLAGE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ==================== Crl.M.C. No. 1186 of 2009-E ==================== Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2009. O R D E R Petitioners are accused 1, 10, 25, 26, 29, 31 and 33 in C.C.No.918/2007 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thodupuzha. First respondent is the complainant. He filed Annexure A1 complaint against 56 accused alleging that they committed offences under Sections 499 and 500 of Indian Penal Code. After recording the sworn statements of the complainant and witnesses, Judicial First Class Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and issued summons. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure A1 complaint contending that it is only an abuse of process of the Court. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and first respondent were heard. Crl.M.C.No.1186/2009-E -2- 3. Annexure A1 complaint and the cognizance taken can be quashed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure only if the averments in the complaint and sworn statements read together do not constitute the offence alleged against the petitioners. Arguments of learned Counsel is that the sworn statements of first respondent and his witnesses do not disclose any publication, which is the most essential ingredient of an offence of defamation and therefore no offence is made out and for that reason Annexure A1 and the case are to be quashed. Learned Counsel appearing for first respondent pointed out that necessary allegations to constitute the offence are there in Annexure A1 with regard to the publication and the complaint and sworn statements can only be read together and so the petition is to be dismissed. On going through Annexure A1 complaint, it cannot be said that ingredients of an offence under Section 500 is not disclosed. If those allegations are to be taken accepted in their entirety, it Crl.M.C.No.1186/2009-E -3- cannot be said that offence is not made out. The question whether the allegations could be accepted or not cannot be decided at this stage. It can only be decided at the time of trial on the evidence to be recorded. Hence on the grounds alleged, it cannot be quashed at the threshold. The petition is therefore dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE dkr