IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 12TH APRIL 2011 / 22ND CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1240 of 2011() ------------------------- CRIME NO.198/2011 OF KOZHIKKODE KASBA POLICESTATION PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- SADGURU MURALIKRISHNA SWAMIJI, S/O.KRISHNAKUTTY GUPTHAN, MANAGING TRUSTEE AND CHAIRMAN, OM SHARAVANA BHAVA DHARMA TRUST, SREEKRISHNAPURAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOZHIKKODE CUSBA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020. 3. SUMESH C.B., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.CHATHUKIDAVU, NANDANATHU POYYIL HOUSE, KOLATHUR P.O., ATHOLI, KOZHIKKODE-673020. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA FOR R1 & R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1240 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of April, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.198 of 2011 of Kasaba Police Station, Kozhikode for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 506(ii) and 120B read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered on a complaint preferred by respondent No.2 before the learned Magistrate and forwarded to the Kasaba Police Station for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner contends that allegations are untrue and the attempt of respondent No.2 is only to harass petitioner and others. Learned counsel refers to Annexure-II, judgment and Annexures-VII and VIII, notices. It is contended that on the date of alleged incident petitioner and others were not even present at the place of (alleged) occurrence. 2. Now the question is whether the FIR registered by the Police is to be quashed as if allegations are untrue or totally improbable. One Mohanan and others approached this Court with W.P.(C) No.6642 of 2011 (E) for a direction to register a case in the matter. It was submitted on behalf of the Sub Inspector, Sreekrishnapuram that enquiry on the complaint referred to in the said case did not reveal commission of any offence. This Court disposed of the case as per Annexure-II, judgment making it clear that no direction to register a case could be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution and that the proper remedy is to Crl.MC No.1240/2011 2 approach the Magistrate (having jurisdiction over the matter) as provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”). The third respondent filed a private complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kozhikode (Annexure-V). That complaint was forwarded to the Police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code. The Police thereon has registered a case as Crime No.198 of 2011 for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 506(ii) and 120B read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. That FIR is challenged in this proceeding. I have gone through Annexure-V, complaint where I find specific allegations made against petitioner (and others) regarding his involvement in the alleged incident. Whether those allegations are correct or not or whether petitioner and others were elsewhere at the time of alleged incident are matters which the Investigating Agency has to look into. The same being disputed questions of fact which the Investigating Officer has to look into, request to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as if the allegations against petitioner are false cannot be entertained. I do not find justifiable reason to quash the FIR against petitioner. Resultantly this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks