IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3657 of 2005 ------------------------- CC.309/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, MATTANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED. -------------------- HAVILDHAFR/P.A.CHANDRAN.A. HEADQUARTERS, 96-INFANTRY BRIGADE, C/O.56, APO. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND STATE. ----------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANNUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR. 2. THE STATE OF REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.P. THOMAS THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-7-2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO. 13231 OF 2005 IN CRL.M.C.NO.3657/2005 DISMISSED. 29-7-2008 SD/-M.C. HARI RANI, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI, J. ====================== CRL.M.C.NO. 3657 of 2005 ======================== Dated this the 29th day of July 2008 ORDER This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner, who is the accused in C.C.No.309/2002 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 9-2-2001 at about 1 p.m. a motor cycle bearing Registration No. DL3 SL5216 driven by the petitioner hit against the de facto complainant and he sustained serious injuries in respect of which Mattannur police registered Crime No.55/2001 for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. True copy of the F.I.S.is produced as Annexure-I, which was recorded by the police on 14-2-2001, wherein it was stated that on 9-2-2001 at about 1 p.m. a jeep bearing registration No. KRN 864 came from Chalode side hit against the de facto complainant and he sustained injuries. Annexure-II is the copy of the report CRMC3657/2005 -2- filed by the Head Constable wherein it was stated that the vehicle involved in the incident occurred on 9-2-2001 was motor cycle DL 3 SL 5216 in respect of which crime No.55/2001 has been registered for the offences under Sections 279 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. Annnexure-II was issued to the brother of the accused/petitioner herein to furnish the official address of the petitioner within seven days of receipt of that notice for the reason that the petitioner was working in the Military service at that time. Annexure-III is produced by the petitioner to show that on 9-2-2001 the petitioner was on duty. Thus it is submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the allegations levelled against him and the de facto complainant met with the accident due to the hit of some other vehicle and the petitioner has no connection with the alleged incident. According to the petitioner, the case was registered against him for the purpose of getting insurance claim and the police charge sheeted the petitioner without conducting any effective investigation. Hence this petition is filed to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.309/202 pending before the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate court, Mattnnur. CRMC3657/2005 -3- 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Public Prosecutor. I have perused the records also. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that it is evident from the certificate produced as Annexure-III that the petitioner herein was on duty/parade on 9-2-2001 and he was working as the Havildar at Headquarters 96 Infantry Brigade, C/o. 56 APO. It is also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that in the F.I.S.,Annexure-I, it was stated by the de facto complainant on 14-2-2001 that on 9-2-2001 at about 1 p.m. one jeep came from Chalode side hit against him and he sustained injuries and he was admitted in the Government Hospital at Thaliparambu. Thereafter, the vehicle has been substituted by adding motor Cycle DL3 SL 5216 which belong to the petitioner for the purpose of getting insurance claim. 4. On the basis of the allegations in this petition filed by the petitioner, this court has directed the learned Public Prosecutor to file a report after making proper enquiry through the concerned Superintendent of Police regarding the fact that any substitution of the vehicle is made in this case for the purpose of CRMC3657/2005 -4- insurance claim. Accordingly, a report is filed by the Superintendent of Police, Kannur on 9-7-2008 before this Court wherein it is reported that C.C.No.309/2002 is pending before the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur and that Crime No.55/2001 was registered for the offences under Sections 279 and 338 I.P.C. after recording the statement of the de facto complainant on 14-2-2001 at A.K.G.Hospital, Kannur and subsequently the de facto complainant has given additional statement to the investigating officer that he was actually hit by a motor bike No.DL 3/ SL 5216. Thereafter the investigating officer questioned the eye witnesses and the pillion rider also and the final charge was laid before the concerned Magistrate court which was numbered as C.C.No.309/2002. It is also reported that no substitution of the vehicle is made for filing the insurance claim and that no such petition is filed by the de facto complainant so far for getting the insurance claim. True copy of the wound certificate is also produced along with the report wherein it is stated that the de facto complainant sustained injury on the head and disoriented and not responding to answer questionnaire. The age of the victim was also noted therein as CRMC3657/2005 -5- 80 years. Thus, it is evident from the records and from the report filed by the Superintendent of Police, Kannur that there is no ground to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.309/2002 as prayed for in this petition. So also the absence of the petitioner at the place of incident and that he was attending his duty in the Military Service at the relevant time etc. can be proved by the petitioner before the concerned Magistrate Court by producing valid and acceptable document. The evidentiary value of Annexure-III will also be decided by the learned Magistrate at the relevant time. Therefore, there is no merit in this petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. In the result, the Crl.M.C.is dismissed. M.C. HARI RANI JUDGE ks.