IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2008 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 742 of 2005() ------------------------ CC.271/2001 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER: --------------- A.DINESH BABU, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.LATE A.SANKUNNY, "SATHYAPRAKASH", KUNDAYITHODU, KOLATHARA P.O., KOZHIKODE THALUK. BY ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CALICUT TOWN POLICE STATION, CRIME NO.88/02 (PENDING AS CC 267/02, JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOZHIKODE), KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. KAMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CRL.M.C.No.742 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of December, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner, who has been charge sheeted by the Station House Officer, Calicut Town Police Station in Crime No.88/2002 for the offence punishable under Section 211 I.P.C, has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the following peculiar facts and circumstances. 2. Petitioner had filed Annexure-1 complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Kozhikode against 3 persons arrayed in the said complaint alleging commission of the offence punishable under Sections 403,418 and 420 read with Section 34 I.P.C. It appears that the said complaint was forwarded by the learned Magistrate to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code. 3. By Annexure-II report dated April 30, 2001, the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police had informed the learned Magistrate that in the course of the investigation it was revealed that the petitioner had made some false allegations against the 3 accused in the complaint and therefore, he was liable to be prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 211 I.P.C. It is also on record that pursuant to the said refer report, petitioner had preferred a protest complaint against the three accused, which was taken on file and is now stated to be pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-V in 2 Crl.M.C.No.742/05 C.C.No.371/2002. 4. It appears that the learned Magistrate by his communication dated April 03, 2002 directed the Station House Officer, Calicut Town Police Station “to take cognizance against the defacto complainant in this case to register a case under Section 211 I.P.C and conduct the investigation”. Pursuant to the above direction, police registered Crime No.88/2002 referred to above (Annexure-VI) and filed final report (Annexure-VII) against the petitioner which is now pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-V in C.C.No.267/2002. 5. The prayer in this petition is to quash Annexure-VII final report and the entire proceedings pending against the petitioner pursuant to the aforesaid final report in C.C.No.267/2002. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the materials available on record, I am satisfied that there is considerable force in the contention raised by the petitioner. The procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate in directing the police to take cognizance and register a case under Section 211 was not correct or proper. Of course, the learned Magistrate could have justifiably forwarded Annexure-II report of the investigating officer for investigation but instead of that the learned Magistrate had directed the police to take cognizance and register a crime against the petitioner under Section 211 I.P.C and conduct the 3 Crl.M.C.No.742/05 investigation. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that grievance of the petitioner is well founded. Therefore, I quash Annexure VII final report submitted by the police in Crime No.88/2002. It is made clear that it will be open to the police to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law, if so advised. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) cl