Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

K.Premraj vs Dr.Abdulla Cherakkad on 14 November, 2025

                                                                2025:KER:86511
Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​       ​    ​    ​     1

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                         PRESENT

                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH

   FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 23RD KARTHIKA, 1947

                               CRL.REV.PET NO. 34 OF 2020

            AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2019 IN CRMP NO.6000 OF

2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,KUNNAMANGALAM

REVISION PETITIONER:

                       K.PREMRAJ​
                       AGED 58 YEARS​
                       S/O. KRISHNAN, MAKKANHIRITE HOUSE, ERAMALA P.O.,
                       KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673501.


                       BY ADV K.PREMRAJ(PARTY-IN-PERSON)

RESPONDENT:

        1              DR.ABDULLA CHERAKKAD​
                       AGED 74 YEARS​
                       S/O. ABDUL KHADER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, MIMS HOSPITAL,
                       GOVINDAPURAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 016.

        2              STATE OF KERALA​
                       REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
                       KERALA, KOCHI-682 031.


                       BY ADVS. ​
                       SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON​
                       SMT.P.VIJAYAMMA​
                       SMT.J.SURYA
                       SMT.SEENA C, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ​


      THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON   12.11.2025,   THE COURT ON 14.11.2025 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                                 2025:KER:86511
Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​    ​     ​     ​    2



                                        ORDER

Aggrieved by the dismissal under Section 203 Cr.P.C, of a complaint filed by the petitioner before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamangalam, he has filed this revision before this Court.

2.​ The allegations in the complaint are summarised as follows:

The complainant was working as Maintenance Supervisor at MIMS Hospital, Kozhikode, where the accused officiated as Managing Director. During that period, he was administered with low doses of poison in the food and beverages being served through the canteen of that hospital. Though the complainant preferred complaints before the Executive Director and Managing Director of the hospital, they did not take any action. On 22.12.2004, the complainant fell unconscious after drinking the tea supplied from the canteen of that hospital. The urine sample analysis of the complainant done at Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Kochi on 23.12.2004 revealed a slight positive presence of lead. On 30.05.2005, a show cause notice was issued to the complainant by the MIMS Hospital alleging unauthorised sale of G.I sheet. It was further alleged that the complainant habitually left the establishment early before office hours. Pursuant to the enquiry 2025:KER:86511 Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​ ​ ​ ​ 3 conducted in connection with the above allegations, the complainant was expelled from service. Forged attendance book and other documents were relied on for the purpose of the aforesaid enquiry. The accused, who is the Managing Director of MIMS Hospital, had alleged that the complainant is a thief and mental patient. The complainant, while working at Fathima Hospital, Kozhikode, had formed a labour union with sixty other staff members against the harassment of the management of that hospital, which paved the way for his dismissal along with other staff from that hospital. Thereafter, the Managing Director of Fathima Hospital had been trying to endanger the life of the complainant by hiring goondas.

3.​ In the enquiry conducted under Section 202 Cr.P.C, the sworn statement of the complainant was recorded, and 18 documents were marked as Exts.P1 to P18. After considering the above records, the learned Magistrate found that there were no sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused in connection with the offences under Sections 307, 499, 500, 465, 469, 471 and 120B I.P.C alleged in the complaint. It is the aforesaid order dated 16.12.2019, which is under challenge in this revision.

2025:KER:86511 Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​ ​ ​ ​ 4

4.​ Heard the revision petitioner who appeared as party-in-person, the learned counsel for the first respondent, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

5.​ As regards the allegation of administration of gradual and slow poisoning done by the accused through the food and beverages served to the complainant through the canteen of the hospital run by the accused, there are only vague and superficial indictments, except for an incident said to have happened on 22.12.2004. According to the complainant, the tea which was served to him through the hospital canteen on 22.12.2004, contained poison deliberately added by the hospital staff. The complainant is said to have fallen unconscious after consuming the above tea. According to the complainant, he was taken to the MIMS hospital itself after falling unconscious, but no effective treatment was done. With regard to the above incident, nothing has been brought on record except the sworn statement of the complainant. According to the complainant, he had undergone blood and urine test at Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Kochi on 23.12.2004 to detect the toxin content which reached his body. Annexure-V toxicology report sheet is relied on by the complainant to show that he was subjected to poisoning. As per Annexure-V report, it is stated that 2025:KER:86511 Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​ ​ ​ ​ 5 the urine tested was slightly positive for lead, and it was suggested confirmation by blood analysis. However, the complainant has not produced any document to show that his blood analysis was done as recommended by the above hospital, and that it also confirmed lead content in his body. The learned Magistrate had rightly taken into account the above aspects to hold that the allegation of poisoning was not substantiated by the records relied on by the complainant.

6.​ The learned Magistrate had also observed in the impugned order that, apart from mere allegations about the attempt of the Chairman and Managing Director of Fathima Hospital to kill him, making use of goondas, nothing has been brought out to substantiate the above allegation. It was also observed in the impugned order that the complainant did not care to arraign the Managing Director of Fathima Hospital during the relevant time as an accused, notwithstanding the allegation that he also tried to endanger his life.

7.​ After analysing the sworn statement and other records relied on by the complainant, the learned Magistrate had observed that the allegation of depicting the complainant as a thief and insane person was also unsubstantiated in the enquiry. The absence of any specific averment as to the person who defamed the complainant in public, and 2025:KER:86511 Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​ ​ ​ ​ 6 also as to whether it resulted in lowering his reputation, defeated the case of the complainant in the above regard.

8.​ As regards the allegation of forgery also, the learned Magistrate observed in the impugned order that the complainant could not produce any material to substantiate the accusation in the above regard. It is further observed that the contention of the complainant that the accused forged the attendance register to show that he was on duty on 23.12.2004, is defeated by his own document which he produced as Ext.P5 which was a show cause notice served on him by the hospital management seeking his explanation for unauthorised absence on 23.12.2004. As regards the criminal conspiracy attributed against the accused, the learned Magistrate observed in the impugned order that the allegation in the above regard is prima facie unsustainable in view of the fact that only one accused has been arraigned in the complaint.

9.​ It is, after taking into account all the above aspects, that the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that there are no sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused. The finding in the above regard cannot be said to be illegal, improper, irregular or erroneous.

2025:KER:86511 Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​ ​ ​ ​ 7 Thus, it is not possible to interfere with the aforesaid order in this revision proceedings.

Resultantly, the petition is hereby dismissed.

         ​         ​   ​   ​     ​     ​     ​     ​      (sd/-)

                                                 G. GIRISH, JUDGE


jsr
                                                                      2025:KER:86511
Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​   ​       ​      ​      8

                           APPENDIX OF CRL.REV.PET 34/2020

PETITIONER ANNEXURES



ANNEXURE 1                         CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER OF CMP 6000/2015
16.12.2019

ANNEXURE 2                         PETITION OF CMP 6000/2015 WITHOUT DOCUMENTS

ANNEXURE 3                         COMPLAINT TO MIMS CHAIRMAN
12.04.2002

ANNEXURE 4                         EVIDENCE OF SHAJI E.V IN ID 26.2007 LABOUR
09.03.2015                         COURT

ANNEXURE 5                         TOXICOLOGY    REPORT   OF     AMRITHA       HOSPITAL,
23.12.2004                         ERNAKULAM

ANNEXURE 6                         LETTER RECEIVED FROM ADGP OFFICE
06.10.2009

ANNEXURE 7                         FIRST SHOW CAUSE ISSUED BY MIMS
08.01.2005

ANNEXURE 8                         LETTER RECEIVED     FROM    C.I   OFFICE,    MEDICAL
14.08.2008                         COLLEGE

ANNEXURE 9                         ENQUIRY   OFFICER   CROSS   IN    I.D.26/2007   PAGE
18.05.2012                         1,2,3

ANNEXURE 10                        ENQUIRY REPORT PAGE 20, ENQUIRY FILE PAGE 69,
                                   PAGE 209, ATTENDANCE REGISTER

ANNEXURE 11                        JUDGMENT OF WPC 25436/2008
17.12.2008

ANNEXURE 12                        PAGE NO.12,40 OF ENQUIRY REPORT

ANNEXURE 13                        PAGE NO.1,25 OF ID 26/2007 AWARD
08.07.2016

ANNEXURE 14                        PAGE 1, 10 OF JUDGMENT WA 1157/2017
12.01.2018

ANNEXURE 15                        PAGE 1, 8 OF JUDGMENT OF MFA 9/98
03.04.2000
                                                             2025:KER:86511
Crl.R.P No.34/2020​​   ​   ​      ​    9

ANNEXURE 16                    PAGE 2 OF ORIGINAL STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION
30.05.2005

ANNEXURE 17                    VOLTAS SERVICE REPORT
31.08.2004

ANNEXURE 18                    PAGE 2 OF REPLACED STATEMENT OF ALLEGATIONS
30.05.2005

ANNEXURE 19                    TECHNICIANS LETTER TO MIMS
14.06.2005

ANNEXURE 20                    SENIOR MANAGER LETTER TO VOLTAS
14.09.2004

ANNEXURE 21                    ORDER OF REVISION   PETITION 853/2015 IN WA
30.09.2015                     1897/2015

Annexure 22                    COPY OF JUDGMENT OF WA 752/2023 DATED
                               15-2-2024
Annexure 23                    EVIDENCE OF PETITIONER IN CMP 6000/2015 DATED
                               14-12-2015
Annexure 24                    TRUE COPY OF ID 26/2007 ORDER OF LABOUR COURT
                               KOZHIKODE,DATED 13/11/2020