Kerala High Court
Alexander vs State Of Kerala
Author: S.S.Satheesachandran
Bench: S.S.Satheesachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/22ND AGRAHAYANA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 3709 of 2012 (C)
--------------------------
CC.775/2010 of J.M.F.C-I,VAIKOM
PETITIONER / ADDL. ACCUSED NO.6 IMPLEADED U/S 319 OF Cr.P.C : -
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXANDER, AGED 51 YEARS,
S/O.PHILIP, VARIKKAM THOTTIYIL,
KALLARA KARA,
KALLARA VILLAGE,
VAIKOM TALUK,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SMT.AMBILY K.
RESPONDENT / STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT : -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM.
2. RAJESH, AGED 33 YEARS,
S/O.KRISHNAN,
THARAYIL THAZHATH VETTIL,
KALLARA KARA,
KALLARA VILLAGE,
VAIKOM THALUK,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. R. RANJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 3709 of 2012 (C)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE I : TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.739/10 OF KADUTHURUTHY
POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE II : TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF THE 2nd RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE III : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.10.12.
ANNEXURE IV : TRUE COPY OF THE FI STATEMENT GIVEN BY 2nd RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES : NIL.
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
DMR/-
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. NO. 3709 of 2012
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of December, 2012
ORDER
Petitioner has been implicated as an additional accused by the magistrate in a pending case invoking his powers under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Annexure III is that order. His name was included as one among the accused in the F.I.R. registered in the crime. However, after investigation he was omitted from the array of accused when final report was filed by the Investigating agency. Cognizance of the offence taken and after further steps trial proceeded, de facto complainant (PW1) in his examination in chief gave evidence implicating petitioner also in the offences involved in the case. Being satisfied from the evidence so tendered through the deposition of PW1, learned magistrate passed Annexure III order. There should be unimpeachable evidence to implead any person as additional accused in the sense that the evidence produced in such a case Crl.M.C. NO. 3709 of 2012 2 must satisfy the court that chance of conviction of the person sought to be proceeded against is more, is the submission of learned counsel for petitioner to assail Annexure III order contending that the court has improperly exercised his jurisdiction. I do not find much merit in that submission. Primarily it is the satisfaction of the court on the evidence let in the case, to invoke Section 319 of the Code for adding a party as an additional accused in the case. There is no rule that the witness examined for accepting his evidence should have been subjected to cross examination. Even if it is so tested, so far as against the person who is sought to be brought in as additional accused such evidence cannot be relied upon to found a conviction because it had been collected behind his back. He should be given further opportunity to cross examine that witness to accept any evidence from that witness to be used against him. In Jayan V. State of Kerala 2012 (4) KLT 240 this court has considered whether there is any binding and mandatory requirement for cross examining the witness to act upon his evidence to invoke Section 319 of the Code to add Crl.M.C. NO. 3709 of 2012 3 another accused and held it is not required. In the given facts of the case, I find no infirmity in Annexure III order passed by the magistrate to interfere with that order exercising the inherent powers of this court, under Section 482 of the Code.
Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE.
DMR/-