IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 4111 of 2006(M) ------------------------- CRIME NO.20 OF2004 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): --------------- SIMON VARGHESE, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. A.C. VARUNNI, ARACKAL HOUSE, NEDUNGAL, NAYARAMBALAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.T.JESTIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEDAYAMANGALAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.4111 of 2006 M -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT Petitioner and counsel absent. No representation. Heard Public Prosecutor. 2. Petitioner is the first informant in Crime No. 20 of 2004 dated 16.1.2004 of Chadayamangalam Police station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. His complaint is that he learned that police referred the case and learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kottarakkara closed the case without issuing notice to him as required under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in UPSC v. Papaiah and others ((1997) 7 SCC 614). He therefore, prayed that a direction be issued to the learned magistrate to order further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. Report was called for from learned Judicial First Class Magistrate- II, Kottarakkara. Learned magistrate has reported that no refer report has been filed in Crime No.20 of 2004 of Chadayamangalam Police station and that the case has not been referred (as on the date of report dated 3.6.2004). In the WP © No.4111/2006 2 light of that report there is no substance in the grievance of the petitioner. In case the case has been referred without notice to the petitioner, it is open to him to initiate appropriate action against such closure. With the above observation, this petition is dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks