IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2011 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 721 of 2011() ------------------------ CP.47/2010 of ADDL.CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 4: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. SIBIN V.S., AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.LATE SOMAN, VATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. SINTO, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.LATE SOMAN, VATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. GIRIJA T.V., W/O.LATE SOMAN, AGED 42 YEARS, VATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. SIDHYA, AGED 20 YEARS, D/O.LATE SOMAN, VATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.DILISH JOHN, SRI.BASIL JOY. RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31. 2. MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.NEELAN, THUNDITHARA HOUSE, BHARATHARANIPALLI ROAD, PANANGAD P.O. ERNAKULAM - 682 506. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.721 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 15th day of March, 2011 ORDER Petitioners are accused in C.P.No.47 of 2010 of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam for offences punishable under Secs.323, 324, 308 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Case is that on 27.04.2010 at about 9.30p.m petitioners attacked the de facto complainant, insulted him by calling his caste name and thereby committed the said offences. Petitioners seek to quash proceeding against them contending that a false case is foisted against them as a counter blast to the police registering a case against the brother-in-law of de facto complainant. Learned counsel contended that on 27.04.2010 at about 8.30p.m the brother-in-law of de facto complainant who is their neighbour trespassed into the house of petitioners and attacked them for which C.C.No.654 of 2010 is pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam. It is also contended by learned counsel that de facto complainant was arrested on 27.04.2010 at about 9.15p.m for offence under Sec.15(c) of the Abkari Act. I have heard learned Crl.M.C.No.721 of 2011 -: 2 :- Public Prosecutor also. Learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that arrest of the de facto complainant under Sec.15(c) of the Abkari Act was on 27.04.2010 at about 10p.m, as alleged in this proceeding. 2. It is seen from the final report that CW13 is cited to prove that she had treated the de facto complainant and issued wound certificate. The statement of CW13 is that she examined the de facto complainant on 28.04.2010 when he was found to have a 3½ cm long wound on the back of the head. The history of alleged cause was stated by de facto complainant as assault by the neighbours. It is also seen from the statement of CW13 that the de facto complainant had complaint of pain on the shoulder. She opined that the injury on the head could be caused by assault with wooden plank or by falling. 3. There are conflicting version regarding the alleged incident. That is not a matter which has to be resolved under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence request to quash proceeding cannot be allowed. Leaving petitioners to take appropriate defence before the appropriate forum this petition is dismissed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/- /True Copy/ P.A to Judge