IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1739 of 2009() ------------------------------ CC.45/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI .................... REVN. PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED : --------------------- 1. R.THYAGARAJAN, THOTTATHIL VEEDU, PALLURUTHY NADA, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE. 2. T.D. SURESH, THARAYIL PARAMBU, D.D. ROAD, PALLURUTHY NADA, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE. 3. K.M. ANTONY, KOCHIER VEEDU, KUMBALANGHI. 4. K.V. LAZAR, KAVALAKKAL VEEDU, EDAKOCHI. 5. ALOCIOUS, MALATTUVEEDY, EDAKOCHI, KUMBALANGHI, 6. V.M. VIJAYAN, VALAPPIL VEEDU, PANAMBUKADU EDAKOCHI. 7. PREMKUMAR, S/O. RAJAN,KUZHEEPARAMBIL KONAM, PALLURUTHY,. 8. SHEELA JEROM, COUNCILOR, 20TH DIVION, PALLURUTHY. BY ADV. SRI.K.L.JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE KOCHI CUSBA POLICE STATION, PALLURUTHY CRIME NO. 636/07, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHIR RAVINDRA BABU THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.R.P.No.1739 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of June, 2009. ORDER Heard counsel for petitioners and the Public Prosecutor who appeared for respondents. 2. Petitioners are charged by Kochi Kasba Police for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 283 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the Code”). The charge is that on 10.5.2007 at about 11-11.30 p.m. they formed unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object blocked the public road to express their protest on the failure of Government and obstructed vehicular traffic along that road. Petitioners sought their discharge contending that no offence punishable under Section 283 of the Code is made out. Learned magistrate refused to accept the prayer. Learned counsel submitted that prima facie the offence under Section 283 of the Code will not stand. Learned counsel placed reliance on the decision in Badrinarain v. State (AIR 1957 Raj. 64). 3. Section 283 of the Code reads thus: “Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation.-Whoever, by doing any act, or by omitting to take order with any property in his possession or under his charge, causes danger, obstruction or injury to any person in any public way or public Crl.R.P.No.1739/2009 2 line of navigation, shall be punished with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees.” What is penalized under that provision is not merely in respect of any order as to the property in the possession of the offender but also causing obstruction to the public way or public line of navigation. In the decision relied on by the counsel for petitioner there was no evidence of assemblage on the road for any common object and that the assemblage came together on the road. Hence it was found that Section 283 of the Code has no application. Now, this court is concerned with the question whether petitioners could be discharged as if the materials on record if unrebutted would not warrant their conviction. In this case the charge is that petitioners formed unlawful assembly, gathered on the public road in prosecution of their common object to cause blockade and obstructed vehicular traffic. On the facts of the case, I find no reason to interfere with the view taken by the learned magistrate. As such no interference is required. Revision petition is dismissed making it clear that it will be open to the petitioners to raise appropriate contentions in the trial court at the appropriate stage. Crl.M.A.No.5311 of 2009 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks