K.J.Chacko vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 65 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
    MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2022/13TH POUSHA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 29762 OF 2021


PETITIONER:

         K.J.CHACKO, AGED 49 YEARS,
         S/O.JACOB, HOUSE NO.6/511,
         GREEN LAND, KUDAPPANAKUNNU,
         PEROORKADA,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 043.

         BY ADVS.
         GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL
         S.VENUGOPAL
         N.P.PRAJEESH


RESPONDENTS:

    1    STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
         THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
         GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

    2    THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
         HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

         SMT.PARVATHY KOTTOL, G.P.

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)No.29762/2021

                                 2



                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2022

The petitioner filed Ext.P1 complaint before the Chief

Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam, against the accused

persons for the offences punishable under Sections 153A,

295A, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner

would submit that as per Section 196 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, no court shall take cognizance of any offence

punishable under Section 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal

Code except with the previous sanction of the Central

Government or the State Government as the case may be.

Therefore, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 application before the 1 st

respondent for getting sanction for prosecution, under Section

196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is

aggrieved by non consideration of Ext.P2 representation.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader representing the WP(C)No.29762/2021

respondents.

3. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 application for

sanction for prosecuting the accused. The application has

been made under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure. It is a statutory requirement. In the

circumstances, the respondents are duty bound to consider

Ext.P2 application in accordance with law. The learned

Government Pleader would submit that the 2nd respondent is

the competent authority to consider Ext.P2 application.

In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P2 representation

submitted by the petitioner for sanction for prosecution under

Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure within a period

of two months.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd/03.01.2022 WP(C)No.29762/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29762/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CMP 78/19 DATED 10/01/2019 BEFORE THE CJM, ERNAKULAM.

Exhibit P2           TRUE COPY OF TH APPLICATION FILED BY
                     THE   PETITIONER    BEFORE   THE   1ST
                     RESPONDENT DATED 27/02/2019.