IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2008 / 14TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3198 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- CRMP.5162/2007 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ADOOR .................... REVN. PETITIONER/ COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------- PODIYAMMA, W/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT PALLITHUNDIL VEETTIL, THENGAMAM MURI, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN MATHEW SRI.MANUEL KACHIRAMATTAM SMT.MERRY GEORGE RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. DIVAKARAN, 50 YEARS OF AGE, RESIDING AT THADATHIL KIZHAKKETHIL VEEDU, THENGAMAM MURI, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. RADHAKRISHNAN @ MONAI, 35 YEARS OF AGE, RESIDING AT THADATHIL KIZHAKKETHIL VEEDU, THENGAMAM MURI, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. KOCHUNARAYANAKURUP, 55 YEARS OF AGE, RESIDING AT VALLITHUNDIL VADAKKETHIL VEEDU, THENGAMAM MURI, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Rs/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== Crl.R.P. NO. 3198 OF 2008 =========================== Dated this the 6th day of October,2008 ORDER This petition is filed under section 397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order in Crl.M.P.5162/2007, a private complaint filed by the complainant against respondents 1 to 3 and three other identifiable persons passed by Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor under section 203 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner was heard. 3. The argument of the learned counsel is that eventhough apart from recording sworn statement of the complainant, statements of two other witnesses were recorded, learned Magistrate without considering the evidence dismissed the complaint under section 203 and the order is illegal. 4. Though Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for dismissal of a complaint CRRP3198/2008 2 after recording the sworn statement of the complainant and examination of the witnesses, that could only be done after considering the statements so recorded along with the report if any submitted by the Police after investigation. The complainant had originally filed Crl.M.P.3886/2006 which was forwarded by the Magistrate under section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure to Station House Officer, Adoor. After investigation a refer report was filed stating that the allegation is false. It is thereafter the present complaint was filed by the petitioner. Learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint stating that on a perusal of the sworn statement of the complainant and the evidence of the witnesses no prima face case was established and the ingredients of the offences are lacking. 5. Learned counsel made available copies of the statements recorded by the learned Magistrate. On going through the statements, it is clear that learned Magistrate has not applied his mind and considered the statements recorded and dismissed CRRP3198/2008 3 the complaint without proper consideration of the materials. In such circumstance, revision petition is allowed. The order passed by the learned Magistrate is set aside and Crl.M.P.5162/2007 is restored and remanded to Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor for reconsideration. Learned Magistrate has to consider the statements of the complainant and the witnesses recorded in the case and thereafter decide whether there is any material to proceed with the complaint and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006