IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1870 of 2007() ------------------------- MC.19/2007 of THE COURT OF THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, PERINTHALMANNA) .................... PETITIONER(S): COUNTER PETITIONER NO.1: --------------------------------------- KONNENGAL BEERAN HAJI, S/O.KAMMUKKUTTY, AGED 57, CHEEKODE AMSOM, CHEEKODE DESOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI SRI.R.ANIL SRI.RAJU RADHAKRISHNAN SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------- STATE, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B.JAYASURYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.1870 of 2007 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of March, 2010 ORDER This petition is filed for quashing Annexure-A. 2. Annexure-A is an order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code ('the Code' for short) directing counter petitioners (petitioner is counter petitioner no.1) to appear before the Sub Divisional Magistrate on 29.5.2007 and to show cause why they should not be ordered to execute a bond for keeping peace for a period of one year under Section 107 of the Code. A report was received from the police was received by the Sub Divisional Magistrate that counter petitioners are committing acts of violence and they are threat to peace and public tranquility in the area. It was reported that three crimes were registered against counter petitioners. On the basis of the report of the police, the Sub Divisional Magistrate initiated proceedings under Section 107 of the Code. Crl.M.C.No.1870 of 2007 2 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is a panchayat president and he is not involved in any criminal offence, as stated in Annexure-A or the report submitted by police before Sub Divisional Magistrate. Proceedings are initiated against petitioner and he is shown as counter petitioner no.1 in Annexure-A, without any materials before the court. Hence this petition is filed to quash Annxure-A, since any further proceedings initiated on the basis of the said order would amount to abuse of process of court. 4. After hearing both sides and going through the documents made available in this case, I find that a report was filed by Sub Inspector before Sub Divisional Magistrate on 18.5.2007 referring to certain cases registered against counter petitioners. Petitioner produced copies of FIR in the cases in which petitioner is allegedly involved, and those are Annexure-B and C. It is clear from Annexure B and C that petitioner is not involved in those crimes and therefore, the report made by Sub Inspector that crime registered against petitioner etc. may not be Crl.M.C.No.1870 of 2007 3 factually correct. It was pointed out at this juncture, that as per a statement filed by Sub Inspector before this court, petitioner was not an accused in the two crimes referred to in Annexure-A order. 5. On going through the report of Sub Inspector dated 18.5.2007 which is the foundation for passing Annexure-A, and Annexure A and B, I am satisfied that petitioner was proceeded against, without any basis, since in crimes referred to in the report, petitioner is not an accused. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that further proceedings on the basis of Annexure-A will amount to abuse of process of court. 6. In the result, the following order is passed: 1. Annexure-A as far as it relates to petitioner is hereby quashed. 2. Petitioner shall not be proceeded against any further based on Annexure-A. Petition is allowed. K.Hema, Judge cms