IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2008 / 14TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3197 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- CRMP.955/2008 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ADOOR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------- VIJAYAN, S/O.NANU, AGED 43 YEARS, VIJESH BHAVANAM, PAZHAKULAM PADINJAREMURI, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN MATHEW SRI.MANUEL KACHIRAMATTAM SMT.MERRY GEORGE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. PARAMESWARAN NAIR @ SOMASEKHAR KOCHUTHUNDIL VEEDU, PAZHAKULAM PADINJAREMURI, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.RAVEENDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== Crl.R.P. NO. 3197 OF 2008 =========================== Dated this the 6th day of October,2008 ORDER This petition is filed under section 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal procedure challenging the dismissal of Crl.M.P.955/2008 a private complaint filed by the petitioner under section 203 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. The complaint was filed subsequent to the submission of a final report by the police after investigation referring the case under section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the court sending a notice to the complainant. The case of the petitioner is that his son Vijish was riding motor cycle KL-03 L 6082 with one Rajeev as a pillion rider through Thengamam-Melkunnumukal public road from south to north on 7.7.2005 and when the motor cycle reached in front of CRRP 3197/2008 2 Subilalayam house first respondent stopped Maruti Car bearing No.KL-04 .G. 4010 which was coming from north to south in a rash and negligent manner by suddenly applying the break and Vijish lost control of the vehicle and hit on the side wall of the road and sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries from Medical College Hospital at 11 p.m on the same day and first respondent thereby committed the offence under section 279 and 304A of IPC. The police has registered Crime 468/2005 on recording the First Information Statement furnished by the pillion rider Rajeev and investigated the case and filed a refer report. It is thereafter court issued notice to the complainant. The protest complaint was filed by the petitioner thereafter. Learned Magistrate recorded the sworn statement of petitioner and Cws. 2 to 4. Based on the evidence learned Magistrate found that there is no prima facie case to be proceeded against first respondent and dismissed the complaint under section 203 of CRRP 3197/2008 3 Code of Criminal Procedure Code. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that CW4 the passenger in the car being driven rashly by first respondent had given evidence that the car was driven rash and negligently and therefore learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing the complaint under section 203 of Cr.P.C. It was also argued that learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing the complaint without discussing the entire evidence. 4. Section 203 of Code of Criminal Procedure provides for dismissal of a complaint after considering the statements on oath of the complainant and of the witnesses and also the result of the enquiry or investigation of the Magistrate is of the opinion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding with the case. The Police after investigation submitted a refer report. Learned Magistrate though did not discuss the evidence in detail found that there is no prima facie case made out against the petitioner to be CRRP 3197/2008 4 proceeded with, as sought for by petitioner. The very case of the petitioner is that deceased was riding the motor cycle from south to north and at the scene of occurrence the Car driven by first respondent came from north to south and it was driven in high speed and suddenly car stopped in front of the motor cycle and because of the fear generated deceased Vijish lost control of the motor cycle and hit on the side wall and he sustained injuries and later succumbed to the injuries. On the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials including the sworn statements recorded by the learned Magistrate, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate as it is neither illegal nor improper. Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006