Kerala High Court
Dipin.P.D vs State Of Kerala on 7 November, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Crl. RP NO.1699 of 2018
1
2024:KER:83221
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 16TH KARTHIKA, 1946
CRL.REV.PET NO. 1699 OF 2018
CRIME NO.850/2013 OF ANGAMALI POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.657 OF
2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ANGAMALY
REVISION PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
DIPIN.P.D
AGED 33 YEARS, S/O P.K. DASAN, PULPARA HOUSE,
PANANGAD P.O, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.
ABDUL JALEEL.A
SMT.M.A.SULFIA
SRI.M.J.PAVU
SRI.K.M.ABDUL MAJEED
SRI.VARUN V GOPAL
RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
ANGAMALY POLICE STATION.
Crl. RP NO.1699 of 2018
2
2024:KER:83221
3 ARUN,
AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. MUKUNDAN, SMITHA BAHVAN @
CHERIYAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, KANJOOR, VADAKUM
BHAGAM VILLAGE.
BY ADV.:
SRI.RENJITH.T.R, SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN
FINALLY HEARD ON 07.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl. RP NO.1699 of 2018
3
2024:KER:83221
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl. RP No.1699 of 2018
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 07th day of November, 2024
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against the
order in CMP No.909/2018 in CC No.657/2016 on the file
of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Angamaly,
arising from Crime No.850/2013 of Angamaly Police
Station.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in the
above case. The petitioner filed an application for
discharge under Section 239 Cr.P.C. before the learned
Magistrate. Annexure-A2 is the discharge petition.
Annexure-A1 is the order passed in it.
3. I am of the considered opinion that Annexure-
A1 is not a speaking order. Several contentions are
Crl. RP NO.1699 of 2018
2024:KER:83221
raised in Annexure-A2 discharge petition. Without
adverting those contentions, the learned Magistrate
dismissed the discharge petition stating that there is
ample material to show that the allegations against the
petitioner are not groundless and the petitioner has to
face trial. This is not the proper way a discharge
petition is to be considered. When a discharge petition
is filed, the learned Magistrate should consider the
contentions raised by the petitioner and thereafter
decide the matter.
4. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on
merit, I am of the considered opinion that, Annexure-A1
can be set aside. The petitioner is free to raise all the
contentions before the jurisdictional court and the
learned Magistrate will consider all those contentions
and thereafter pass appropriate orders in it, in
accordance with law.
Therefore, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed
Crl. RP NO.1699 of 2018
2024:KER:83221
in the following manner:
1. Annexure-A1 order is set aside.
2. The jurisdictional Magistrate is directed to
reconsider Annexure-A2, after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner
and the Prosecutor concerned, as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within a period of 6 weeks from the date
of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
nvj JUDGE
Crl. RP NO.1699 of 2018
2024:KER:83221
APPENDIX OF CRL.REV.PET 1699/2018
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,
ANGAMALY IN CC.NO, 657/2016.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF DISCHARGE PETITION.
ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE
COMPLAINT FILED BY COMPLAINANT BEFORE
THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-II,AlUVA AS
ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF FIR.
ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT.
ANNEXURE A6 THE TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT FILED
UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
