IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19365 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ VASUDEVAKAMATH, S/O.NARASIMHAKAMATH, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT SUNRISE HOUSE, KUTHIYATHODU VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NORTH PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. 3. MURENDRA PRABHU, S/O.PADMANABHA PRABHU, KANNAMPARAMBIL, PARUR KARA, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 4. VENUGOPAL PRABHU, S/O.PADMANABHA PRABHU, KANNAMPARAMBIL, PARUR KARA, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 5. JALADHEEN PRABHU,S/O.RAJENDRANATH PRABHU KANNAMPARAMBIL, PARUR KARA, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 6. VINAYAKUMAR PAI, S/O.VISWANATHAN, CHEEMAKKULAM HOUSE, KANNAMPARAMBIL, PARUR KARA, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 7. RAMASH, S/O.BABULA SHENOY, KANNAMPARAMBIL, KADAVATHUKKATTIL, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 8. MAJUNATH, S/O.RAMANDASHENOI, KANNAMPARAMBIL, KADAVATHUKKATTIL, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 9. DEEPESH, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMA PAI, KANNAMPARAMBIL, KADAVATHUKKATTIL, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 10. ROOPESH, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMA PAI, KANNAMPARAMBIL, KADAVATHUKKATTIL, PARAVUR VILLAGE. 11. KRISHNARU PAI, S/O.VENKITESWARA PAI, KANNAMPARAMBIL, KADAVATHUKKATTIL, PARAVUR VILLAGE. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ W.P(C). No.19365 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This Writ Petition is directed against a wrong procedure followed before the learned Magistrate before recording an order of acquittal in a prosecution for offences punishable inter alia under Section 427 r/w 149 I.P.C. The petitioner herein is the defacto complainant. The short grievance of the defacto complainant is that throwing to the winds all norms of refined procedure, the judgment of acquittal has been rendered. The Registry raised an objection about the maintainability of the Writ Petition. But it was directed to be numbered and the matter was heard in admission. 2. The impugned order is one which the petitioner can assail by resort to the avenue of challenge available to him under the Code of Criminal Procedure. When such avenues are available, normally and ordinarily a person aggrieved like the petitioner must be relegated to resort to such ordinary avenues of challenge to seek redressal. Not that this Court does not have W.P(C). No.19365 of 2008 2 jurisdiction under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere and pass appropriate orders, but ordinarily and normally when the aggrieved person who comes before this Court has appropriate alternative courses to be pursued otherwise under law, this Court should and must be reluctant to invoke such constitutional jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 3. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed but with the specific observation that the petitioner can seek his relief by adopting the avenues of challenge available under the Code to assail the impugned order. Return the copy of the judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioner forthwith. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-