Kerala High Court
Reji Sam Mathew vs State Of Kerala, Represented By Public ... on 23 May, 2025
2025:KER:35613
CRL.MC NO. 10520 OF 2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2025 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10520 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 23.07.2024 IN CC NO.325
OF 2023 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM/
SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF CYBER CRIME
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
1 REJI SAM MATHEW
AGED 38 YEARS
WORKING AS TRACK MAINTAINER IN RAILWAY, RESIDING AT
TC NO. 20/1452, PANDIT COLONY, KOWDIAR.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003
2 M.O.SAMUEL
AGED 70 YEARS
RETIRED CONFIDENTIAL ASSISTANT OF KSRTC, RESIDING AT
TC NO. 20/1452, PANDIT COLONY, KOWDIAR.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003
3 REJEENA MARY
AGED 66 YEARS
RETIRED SENIOR SECTION OFFICER OF RAILWAY, RESIDING
AT TC NO. 20/1452, PANDIT COLONY, KOWDIAR.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695003
BY ADVS.
M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR
SUDHIR KUMAR B.
2025:KER:35613
CRL.MC NO. 10520 OF 2024 2
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 ANN MARY VARGHESE
SHARON HOUSE, ALTHARA NAGAR, VELLAYAMBALAM,
SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695010
BY ADVS.
V.PREMCHAND .
HALIYA T.P.(K/001754/2022)
MAHADEV M.J.(K/182/2022)
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT PUSHPALATHA M.K., SR PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:35613
CRL.MC NO. 10520 OF 2024 3
ORDER
The proceedings in C.C.No.325/2023 on the files of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram are under challenge in this
petition filed by the petitioners/accused under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. The offence alleged against the accused are under
Sections 498A and 323 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The 1 st
accused is the husband of the defacto complainant and the 2 nd and 3rd
accused are the father and mother of the 1st accused.
3. The prosecution case is that the 1 st accused, who
married the defacto complainant on 14.05.2020, had been physically and
mentally torturing her, demanding more dowry, while they were residing
together at the residence of the accused. The 2 nd and 3rd accused were
also alleged to have joined the 1 st petitioner in perpetrating the above
cruelty. It is stated that the accused wanted to have 20 sovereigns of gold
ornaments and an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-, which was deposited as fixed
deposit in KSFE Peroorkada branch, which belonged to the defacto
complainant, and they often quarreled with the defacto complainant for
not acceding to the above demand.
4. The case was registered by the Museum Police Station,
2025:KER:35613
Thiruvananthapuram on the basis of the First Information Statement
given by the defacto complainant. After the completion of the
investigation, the Sub Inspector of Museum Police Staion has laid the final
report before the learned Magistrate. The final report was accepted to
files and summons was ordered to the accused. Thereafter the petitioners
2 and 3 filed the petition for discharge before the learned Magistrate,
which was dismissed on 23.07.2024.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned counsel representing the defacto complainant and the learned
Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
6. The final report and the accompanying records relied
on by the prosecution would reveal that the investigating agency had
garnered the requisite materials in support of the offence alleged against
the petitioners.
7. In addition to the statement of the defacto
complainant, the prosecution has cited CWs2 to 5 to establish the charge
levelled against the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners
would contend that the evidence of CW2 to CW5 cannot be acted upon,
since it is hear-say in nature. It is true that the statements, which CW3 to
CW5 have given to the Investigating Officer, are about the information
which they received from the defacto complainant about the cruelty
2025:KER:35613
meted out to her by the accused. However, the statement which the
prosecution proposed to bring out from CW2, is about the act of the
accused, who expelled the defacto complainant from their house, after
subjecting her to severe physical and mental cruelty, demanding more
dowry. All those aspects relating to the acceptability of the evidence
adduced by those witnesses cannot be dealt with by this Court in a
petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023.
8. On going through the order passed by the learned
Magistrate, it is seen that the said order contains the requisite particulars,
to be taken into account, while dealing with an application for discharge
under Section 227 Cr.P.C. It is well settled that at the time when the court
is considering the question of discharge, it is not expected to evaluate the
entire evidence meticulously, to arrive at a finding about the probability
of conviction. All that is required to be looked into is,
whether the available records relied on by the prosecution, would make
out the offence alleged against the accused, so that, the trial Court could
come to a finding as to whether there is sufficient ground to proceed
against the accused. As far as the present case is concerned, it is seen
that the learned Magistrate has rightly arrived at a finding in that regard
in the order which she passed on 23.07.2024. So also, the prosecution
2025:KER:35613
records would clearly establish that there are the requisite materials to
show that the petitioners are liable to undergo trial for the offence alleged
against them.
9. Therefore, the present petition filed by the petitioners
is devoid of merits.
Resultanly, the petition is hereby dismissed.
sd/
G.GIRISH
JUDGE
jm/
2025:KER:35613
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10520/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 THE COPY OF FINAL REPORT KPF NO.29 DATED
20.07.2023 WITH FIR/FIS ISSUED BY CJM
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, FIR NO.347 OF
2023 DATED 01.04.2023
Annexure 2 .'CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN THE DISCHARGE
PETITION UNDER CRL.M.P NO.841/2024 IN C.C
Annexure 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF ALLEGED TREATMENT
CERTIFICATE WHICH IS ONLY A REPLY LETTER
FROM THE DOCTOR TO MUSEUM POLICE
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT ON 25.09.2024 IN
KAILASHBENMAHENDRABHAI PATEL &ORS VS STATE
OF MAHARASHTRA &ANR (CRIMINAL APPEAL
NO.4003/2024 ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL)
NO.4044 OF 2018)
