Manoj Philip vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short,' Cr.P.C.' hereinafter) to quash Annexure A1 complaint, Annexure A6 Order and all further proceedings in C.C.No.197/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur, arose out of Crime No.2162/2014 of Chengannoor Police Station, Alappuzha.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have perused the relevant records.

The genesis of the prosecution case is from Annexure A1 complaint filed by the complainant (2nd respondent herein) before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Chengannur. As per the complaint, the complainant alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC, by accused Nos.1 to 4. Complaint was referred to police for investigation and Annexure A3 FIR was registered. Thereafter, final report was filed, stating that the allegations in the complaint are false. Challenging the finding of the final report, the complainant filed protest complaint before the learned Magistrate and given statements of herself as well as the witnesses. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate took cognizance for the above offences.

Thereafter, the order taking cognizance was challenged before this Court in Crl.M.C.No.4080/2022 and this Court, as per order, dated 15.2.2022 set aside the order of cognizance with direction to pass fresh order after going through the complaint, affidavit, documents filed by the complianant along with the protest complaint, statements of witnesses recorded under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. and Annexure A4 final report.

Thereafter, the learned Magistrate, in obedience of the direction in Crl.M.C.No.4080/2022, again passed Annexure A6 order and took cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC and now, the matter has been pending as C.C.No.197/2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur. In paragraph Nos.4 and 5 of Annexure A6 order, the learned Magistrate considered the matter for the purpose of deciding as to whether cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC was necessary and it was observed as under:

Perused the affidavit, petition, sworn statement of the complainant and one witness, final report filed by the police in Chengannur police station crime no. 2162/14 and other records. The complainant gave sworn statement in tune with the averments in the petition. She had sweared that R1 to R4 subjected her to cruelty by harassing her mentally and physically demanding more dowry. She has further deposed that R1 to R3 physically assaulted her, did not give food to her and used to lock her inside the room while they were residing at South Africa. She has further stated that R1 used to inflict burn injuries on her body with cigarettes and he has illicit relation with another lady. The witness who had given statement had deposed that the complainant is the daughter of his wife's sister. He has given statement that the respondents used to harass the complainant mentally and physically stating that Rs. 10,00,000/- and 50 sovereigns of gold given by her parents is not sufficient. She had returned from South Africa due to the mental and physical harassments of R1 to R3. He had seen burn injuries on her body inflicted by R1. From the above sworn statements of the complainant and the witness and from the affidavit it is prima facie found that the respondents had subjected the complainant to cruelty.

In the refer report filed by the police it is stated that the petitioner married to R1 after converting to Christianity and it is only after the marriage R1 got the knowledge that the petitioner has not passed the examination for B. Tech. Hence issues aroused between them. After returning from South Africa she filed complaint before the Court with false allegations due to mental agony as R1 came to know that she did not pass B. Tech. In the refer report it is not stated as to how the investigating officer came to such a conclusion. It is not stated that any of the witnesses gave such an evidence or that it is otherwise came in to evidence. It is not stated in the refer report that the investigating officer had taken statement of any relatives or neighbours of the petitioner or the respondents. Hence the refer report is not acceptable. From the affidavit of the complainant, sworn statement of the complainant and witness, the protest complaint, refer charge and other records, it is found that the complaint has got a prima facie case against the respondents u/s. 498 A r/w. 34 of IPC. Hence cognizance taken for the above offences and the complaint is taken in to file as C.C.197/23.

On perusal of the finding of the trial court, it is discernible that, in the sworn statement given by the complainant, she disclosed prima facie materials to take cognizance as against accused Nos.1 to 4.

Since in Annexure A6 order of the learned Magistrate read along with the materials, it could be gathered that the learned Magistrate took cognizance by the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC, acting on the statement of the victim and ignoring the report of the investigating officer as against the said statement. Therefore, the cognizance order, Annexure A6 is perfectly justified and the matter would require trial.

Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed with direction to the trial court to expedite the trial, in fact, arose out of the crime of the year 2014, without fail, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Registry is directed to inform this matter to the trial court, for information and further steps.