IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4858 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- [CP.NO.2/2007 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHENGANNUR] .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- MATHEWS MATHEW, S/O. MATHEW, KEEZHCHERI PALLATH VEETTIL, THITTAMEL MURIYIL, CHENGANNUR VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.P.HARIDAS. RESPONDENTS/ STATE & COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE S.I. OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR. 3. GANDHIDEVAN, S/O. THIRUVAN, KONATHU VEETTIL, ANGAADIKKAL, THEKKUM MURI, CHENGANNUR VILLAGE. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR, R3 BY ADV. SMT.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM). THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.M.C. NO.4858/2008-F: CRL.APPL. NO. 7096/2008 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 4858/2008-F DISMISSED 30/09/2009. SD/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No.4858 OF 2008 =========================== Dated this the 30th day of September,2009 ORDER Petitioner is the accused and third respondent the complainant in C.P.2/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chengannur. Third respondent filed Annexure-5 protest complaint after Annexure 2 refer report was filed on investigation in Crime 718 of Chengannoor Police Station, registered for the offence under section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act on receipt of the complaint sent by the learned Magistrate under section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned Magistrate after recording the sworn statement of the third respondent and three witnesses took cognizance of the offence under section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocity) Act and issued summons to the petitioner under section 203 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that it is only an abuse of process of the court. Crl.M.C.4858/2008 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the third respondent were heard. 3. Learned counsel submitted that as evidenced by Annexures 3 and 4 judgments of the civil court, the claim raised by the third respondent was rejected and a decree was granted in favour of the petitioner and Annexure 5 protest complaint was filed after 11 months from the submission of Annexure 2 final report. Annexure 2 final report shows that after receipt of the refer report notice was issued by the learned Magistrate to the third respondent the de facto complainant only on 15.7.2006 to appear on 10.8.2006, Annexure 5 complaint was filed on 18.11.2006. In such circumstance based on the delay cognizance taken cannot be quashed. 4. Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance on recording the sworn statements of the complainant as well as three other witnesses. In such circumstances, I find no reason to quash the complaint as sought for. Being a private complaint, taken cognizance by the learned Magistrate which is to be tried by the learned Sessions Judge, statements of all the witnesses are to be recorded by the Magistrate at the committal stage. After recording the evidence, Magistrate has to consider the question whether the case is to be committed to the Crl.M.C.4858/2008 3 Sessions Court. Petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate at that stage. If the case is committed, petitioner is at liberty to raise all the contentions before the learned Sessions Judge, at the stage of hearing under section 227 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that if an attempt is made by the learned Magistrate to settle the dispute, it is possible that the disputes will be settled. Learned Magistrate may see whether a settlement could be arrived at. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006