Kerala High Court
Joy vs The State Of Kerala on 7 November, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2024:KER:83169
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 16TH KARTHIKA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 6954 OF 2018
CRIME NO.1084/2017 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI
IN CC NO.1537 OF 2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS -I (FOREST OFFENCES), THODUPUZHA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
JOY,
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O KOCHUVARKEY,
CHELAMANA, PERUMPALLICHIRA P O,
KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA,
IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
K.R.PRATHISH
P.K.SREEVALSAKRISHNAN(K/581/2005)
JOEL CHALAMANA(K/001360/2022)
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.
2 ANAS,
S/O MUHAMMED,
VADAKKUMPADATH HOUSE,
PERUMPULLICHIRA,
KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA,
IDUKKI DISTRICT-685584.
BY ADV. NOUSHAD K. A,
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:83169
Crl.M.C. No.6954 of 2018
-:2:-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.6954 of 2018
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of November, 2024
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.1537/2017 on the files of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha. He seeks to quash the
aforesaid proceedings through this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
2. Prosecution alleged that on 15.06.2017, the accused had
abused the defacto complainant and his brother, who is a physically
disabled person, by pushing him and assaulting him. When the defaco
complainant tried to intervene, he was also assaulted behinds his ears
and also kicked him on his back, and the accused thereby committed the
offence under Section 294(b) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. I have heard Sri. K.R.Prathish, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri. Noushad.K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that
the offences alleged against the petitioner are not made out from the
allegations, I am of the view that as far as Section 323 IPC is concerned,
specific allegations have been alleged, and therefore, this is not a fit case
for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Even though the petitioner
contended that the statement of witnesses would disprove the allegations
levelled against him, it is not proper of this Court to carry out a mini-trial
2024:KER:83169
by sifting through the materials and analysing the nature of evidence to
arrive at a conclusion.
5. In this context, it is apposite to mention that while exercising
the power under section 482 Cr.P.C, it is not proper for this Court to sift
or weigh the materials and then come to a conclusion one way or the
other. Reference to the decision in State of Kerala v. O.C. Kuttan
[(1999) 2 SCC 651) is appropriate in this context. Similarly, in the decision
in State of U.P v. O.P.Sharma [(1996) 7 SCC 705] it was observed that
High Courts should be loath to interfere at the threshold to thwart a
prosecution exercising its inherent power and instead must allow the law
to take its own course. Further, in Mahendra K.C. v. State of
Karnataka and Ors. [(2022) 2 SCC 129] , it was observed that the power
under section 482 should be exercised sparingly and cautiously and only
when the Court is of the opinion that there will be a gross miscarriage of
justice, should resort be made to such powers.
6. It is thus trite that the power of quashing criminal
proceedings should be exercised with circumspection and that too, in
exceptional cases and it is not justifiable for this Court to embark upon an
enquiry as to the reliability, genuineness or otherwise of the allegations
made in the final report. A finding on the veracity of a material relied on
by the prosecution in a case where the allegations levelled by the
prosecution disclose a cognizable offence is not a consideration for the
High Court while exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC.
2024:KER:83169
In view of the above, I find no merit in the contentions advanced
and hence, this criminal miscellaneous case is dismissed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
Jka/07.11.24.
2024:KER:83169
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME 1092/2017 OF
THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE III TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE IMPACT OF
INJURY OF THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL CHARGE SHEET
NO.1092/17 DATED 24.7.2017 SUBMITTED
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT, THODUPUZHA AT MUTTOM.
ANNEXURE V TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.6.2018
IN WPC.21954/2017.
ANNEXURE VI CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET/FINAL
REPORT IN CRIME NO.1084/17 SUBMITTED
BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
THODUPUZHA.
