IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 814 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRMP.2232/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, ETTUMANUR REVN. PETITIONER(S): --------------------- SHAJI MATHEW, S/O.K.P.MATHEW, VILLUTHARA VEEDU, KARITHASKARA, THELLAKOM P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERANAKULAM. 2. ROY SIZER, MURIPARAMBIL VEEDU, CHAMAKKALAKARA, KOTHANALLOOR VILLAGE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. PUZHAKKARA MOHAMMED FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2009, THE COURT ON 11/03/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Crl.R.P. No. 814 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 11th day of March, 2009 O R D E R Revision petitioner who was the complainant in a private complaint registered as Crl. M.P. No. 2232/2007 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ettumanoor challenges the order dated 13-1-2009 passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing the complaint under section 203 Cr.P.C. 2. According to the complaint, on 28-2-2007 at about 1.30 p.m. the accused who is the Manager of a concern by name Vam Concretes assaulted him, abused him in obscene words and he sustained injuries in the incident. 3. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and after taking the sworn statement of the complainant, the learned Magistrate conducted enquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C. by postponing the issue of summons. The learned Magistrate had ordered investigation by the local police. During the investigation, it is revealed that the prior to the alleged occurrence the complainant had assaulted the accused and a case was registered by the Ettumanoor Police for offences punishable under sections 452 and 323 read with section 34 IPC and the above case was pending Crl.R.P. 814/09 -2- trial before the learned Magistrate as C.C. No.189/2007. 4. After considering the interested testimony of complainant and his witnesses, as also the testimony of CW3 doctor who deposed that there was only abrasion on the left thumb of the complainant, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the present case was only a counter blast to C.C. No.189/2007 pending before that court. The conclusion arrived at by the learned Magistrate is after a careful evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any good reason to interfere with the order passed by the court below. Hence, this revision petition is dismissed in limine. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. mn.