IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1929 CRL.A.No. 468 of 2000() ---------------------------------- SC.3/1993 of ADDL.ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT/ COMPLAINANT ------------------ THOMAS S/O. OUSEPH, MADATHIL HOUSE, AYARKUNNAM MARICAD, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED AND STATE ----------------------- 1. JOSEPH @ JOSE, CHAKKALATHOTTIYIL, AYARKUNNAM, NERICAD, KOTTAYAM. 2. JOBI OF DO. DO. 3. MARIAMMA JOSEPH OF DO. DO. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.JAMES KURIAN FOR R1-3 SRI.SANTHOSH MODAYIL FOR R1-3 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER,J ======================= Crl.Appeal.No.468 of 2000 ========================== Dated this the 25th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Appellant was the complainant in C.C.No.215/92, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kottayam. He had filed the said complaint alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 143,147,324 and 506(1) read with Section 149 I.P.C. against five accused out of which only three were alive at the time when the case was ultimately taken up. Those three accused are respondents 1 to 3 in this appeal. 2. The above complaint was committed to the court of Sessions and numbered as S.C.No.3/93 to be tried along with S.C.No.19/91 and S.C.No.14/92, since the alleged incidents in the three cases had arisen from the same transaction which had allegedly occurred at about 7.45 a.m. on November 2, 1989. In S.C.19/91, petitioner was the sole accused. He faced the trial for an offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. In S.C.14/92 one Jobi (respondent No.2 herein) was the sole accused. Petitioner was the defacto complainant in that case. The offence alleged against Jobi was punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. Crl.A.No.468/2000 2 3. The grievance of the petitioner in his complaint was that (S.C.3/93) he had been assaulted by the accused, five in number while he was going to his house. In the assault he had sustained injuries on his neck and hand. The three cases were tried and disposed of simultaneously by the court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Kottayam. 4. The grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that none of the witnesses cited by him in his private complaint had been summoned and examined by the court below. According to him, he was constrained to file the private complaint since the police had failed to conduct a proper investigation. Therefore, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge was legally bound to give sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to examine all his witnesses. That not having been done the order of acquittal passed by the court below is liable to be set aside, it is contended by the learned counsel. In this context, it may be noticed that the alleged incident had taken place in November 1989. All the three cases were tried and disposed of by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge Crl.A.No.468/2000 3 acquitting all the accused in the three cases. Moreover, two of the five accused who were arraigned in this complaint had passed away. Even assuming there was some minor irregularity in the procedure followed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of acquittal. Therefore, the appeal fails. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER,JUDGE dvs