IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1527 of 2009 ---------------------------------- CC.NO.340/2009 OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM. .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- BINDU, W/O JAYAKUMAR, AGED 35, PULLAM PLAVIL VEETTIL, NEAR POLICE STATION, PIRAVAM KARA, PIRAVAM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. MR.R.ARUN RAJ, MR.N.R.RAJESH. RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CITY TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, KOCHI CITY(THRIPUNITHURA WING) (CRIME NO.411 OF 2008) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1527 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is an accused in C.C.No.340/2009 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam. Prosecution case is that on 16.1.2008 at about 9 a.m., petitioner was riding Honda Activa Scooter KL-17/7753 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and by such driving hit on motor cycles KL-7/Z 6920 and also on KL-7/AT 3059 and thereby committed offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure to quash the prosecution contending that petitioner was not in any way involved in the incident. 2. According to the petitioner, she was riding from her house to the office along the Kakkanad- Irimpanam road at about 9 a.m. and when she reached the middle of Chitrapuzha Bridge, she heard a noise CRMC 1527/09 2 of accident on her back and due to the said shock, her Honda scooter slipped and she fell on the road and sustained abrasions on her right hand and she had seen three motor cycles colliding together and somebody getting seriously injured and she went from the spot as she has nothing to do with the incident and the case is falsely foisted against her and therefore, the prosecution is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that there is no acceptable legal evidence to convict the petitioner and even the report from Forensic Science Laboratory is not received and in the absence of that report, petitioner cannot be convicted and hence, the case is to be quashed. 5. Sufficiency of the evidence for conviction cannot be decided in this petition under Section CRMC 1527/09 3 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. It is a matter to be considered by the learned Magistrate at the time of trial. Petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions, including lack of report from Forensic Science Laboratory before the learned Magistrate. Petitioner is also entitled to seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure and raise all the contentions before the Magistrate, if charge is not framed. Petition is disposed. 13th August, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv