Kerala High Court
Jiyas vs Joel Andrews on 19 November, 2012
Author: S.S.Satheesachandran
Bench: S.S.Satheesachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/28TH KARTHIKA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 3570 of 2012
--------------------------
CC.116/2011 of J.M.F.C.-II, ALUVA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: -
-----------------------------------------
1. JIYAS, S/O. FAROOK, AGED 23 YEARS, KONATH HOUSE,
KUTHIRAKULAM P.O. VEMBAYAM KARA, NEDUMANGAD TALUK.
2. ANAND KRISHNA, S/O. MADHUSOODANAN NAIR, AGED 22 YEARS,
SREE ANAND, KPRA 75M, LMS JUNCTION, ATTINGAL KARA,
CHIRAYINKEEZHU.
3. ANOOP, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. SIVAN, KAVUMPURATH HOUSE,
VETUKAD KARA, PUTHOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR.
4. THOMASS, S/O. THOMAS, AGED 22 YEARS, KUZHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
MATHADI KARA, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA.
5. ROSHITH, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN,
MANGATTUPARAMBIL HOSE, THENIDUKKU KARA, VADAKKANCHERY.
6. SHINAS B. SALAM, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL SALAM,
THEKKEKARA HOUSE, KUTTIPUZHA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA.
7. ANEES U., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. USUS KUNJU, NADEERA MANZIL,
MANANAKKU, CHIRAYINKEEZHU.
BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN
RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT AND STATE: -
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. JOEL ANDREWS, S/O. ANDREWS, CHOONDAT HOUSE,
VALILLAPUZHA P.O.,
KEEZHUPARAMBU VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION - 683 503.
3. STATE, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.ANIL
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. R. REMA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 3570 of 2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE I : TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT.
ANNEXURE II : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE 1st RESPONDENT TO
THE PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGE.
ANNEXURE III : COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT.
ANNEXURE IV : COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES : NIL.
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
DMR/-
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. NO. 3570 of 2012
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2012
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused in a pending case numbered as C.C. No.116 of 2011 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Aluva. They are being prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 294(b) and 506(i) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998. The crux of the allegation is that petitioners who are stated to be medical students in Kalamassery Co-operative Medical College committed ragging of the first respondent, a second year student of the college, and thereby committed the offences imputed as aforesaid. Petitioners have filed the aforesaid petition for quashing the final report filed by the police and further proceedings taken against them on such report by the magistrate. Petitioners have entered into a settlement with the de facto complainant, is the case canvassed for to quash Crl.M.C. NO. 3570 of 2012 2 to the proceedings against them invoking the inherent powers of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for short the 'Code'.
2. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners also attempted to project arguments that the report filed by the police under Section 173(2) of the Code and materials produced with such report, do not make out any offence against any of the petitioners, to prosecute them for the offences imputed. Having regard to the nature of the offences imputed against the petitioners and also that after investigation police found sufficient reason to indict them including an offence covered by the Ragging Act, I find settlement purported to have been effected by the petitioners/accused with the de facto complainant cannot be given any consideration, to invoke the inherent powers of this court for quashing the proceedings. After looking into the annexures produced also, I do not find any merit in the submission made to quash the proceedings. Whatever defences/challenges available to the petitioners, no doubt, Crl.M.C. NO. 3570 of 2012 3 can be canvassed by them before the magistrate.
Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE.
DMR/-