CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI vs STATE OF KERALA

Petitioner is the accused in CC.112/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s Court-IX, Ernakulam, for the offences punishable under

Sections 279 and 337 IPC and Section 22(c) read with Section 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The allegation against the petitioner is that he

drove his car from West to East through Palarivattom - Kakkanad road in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and caused to

hit on the scooter being ridden by the de facto complainant, thereby causing hurt.

This Court had ordered a further investigation in the matter under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. A further investigation was conducted in the case

against the petitioner as well as the case against the de facto complainant, which was registered for the offences under Section 279 IPC and

Section 120(j) of the Kerala Police Act. A further investigation was conducted and a further final report was filed in which also the very same

offences alleged against the petitioner earlier have been identified to be the offences against the petitioner.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the further final report filed by the investigating officer in Crime No.1380/2015,

which was registered against the de facto complainant herein, clearly reveals that the investigating officer was satisfied that the petitioner had not

committed any fault and he was driving the car with due care and caution abiding by law.

The attested copy of the further final report has been produced. Page No.3 of it clearly shows that the petitioner drove the car from West to

East through the Palarivattom - Kakkanad road. When green signal was there at the Palarivattom junction, he drove the car forward and swerved

it to right for proceeding to Vyttila. When he reached the middle of the road, the signal changed and it became yellow. Within five seconds, the

yellow light changed to red, which gave green signal to the other vehicles coming from Kakkanad to Palarivattom. By that time, the de facto

complainant, who was riding her scooter, came and hit on the side of the car of the petitioner, which resulted in the incident.

When the investigating officer was satisfied about the said aspect, there was no reason for the investigating officer in not referring the case

against the petitioner. The investigating officer ought to have referred the case against the petitioner. The offences alleged against the petitioner are

not legally sustainable in view of the findings entered by the investigating officer in the further final report filed in Crime No.1380/2015 of the City

Traffic Police Station, Ernakulam, Kochi City.

Matters being so, all further proceedings against the petitioner in CC No.112/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s Court-IX,

Ernakulam, which has arisen from Crime No.1372/2015 of City Traffic Police Station, Ernakulam, Kochi City, are liable to be quashed.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioner in CC No.112/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s

Court-IX, Ernakulam, which has arisen from Crime No.1372/2015 of City Traffic Police Station, Ernakulam, Kochi City, are quashed.