SAJIMON Vs. SAJI KAKKANAD SAJI K A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) On a reference made by the learned Single Judge this matter was placed before us. The question that was raised before learned Single Judge was whether during the pendency of committal proceedings, committing court can take cognizance of any offence in respect of selfsame incident on the basis of an oral complaint made by the accused facing the committal proceedings and hold an enquiry under S.202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (in short the Code).

(3.) Factual background need to be noted in brief is as follows: Sajimon, son of George, accused in C.P. No. 4/1997 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate First Class's Court, Kuthuparamba filed a petition under S.482 of the Code for quashing the proceedings against him. He claimed to have been arrayed as an accused on the basis of the statement allegedly made by the accused in another case, ie. C.P. No. 9/95. Kuthuparamba Police registered Crime No. 34/1994 for an offence under S.307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (in short, IPC) in respect of an incident which allegedly took place on 30.1.1994 at Neerveli, involving a maruthi van bearing registration No. KL/11-A2454. Case of the prosecution was that the driver of the aforesaid van had driven the vehicle at great speed and attempted to hit the vehicle against a policeman who signalled to stop the van and caused his death. After investigation police filed a chargesheet before the Judicial Magistrate First Class's Court, Kuthuparamba against Saji Kakkanad, son of Augustine. Said Saji Kakkanad appeared before the Court on 10.7.1995, and was remanded to Sub Jail. Subsequently he was released on bail and the case was posted to 24.7.1995. On that day he made an oral complaint before the Magistrate that he was not the person driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged incident, but Sajimon, son of George was driving the vehicle. He further stated that Sajimon caused the vehicle to knock down a lady pedestrian and proceeded without stopping the vehicle there and he did not stop the vehicle eventhough police personnel signalled to stop the same. He further stated that there were altogether six persons, including himself, in the vehicle. Magistrate recorded the aforesaid statement purportedly under S.190(1)(c) of the Code and took cognizance of the offence under S.307 IPC and proceeded to take evidence under S.202 of the Code. He recorded the statements of other alleged passengers in the vehicle, the police personnel who tried to stop the vehicle and also the police officials who investigated the case. A bail application in the name of Saji Kakkanad was filed before Judicial Magistrate First Class's Court, Kuthuparamba by an advocate and the same was dismissed for default. When Saji Kakkanad gave this statement before the Judicial Magistrate First Class's Court, he disowned filing of any application for bail at the crime stage and stated that he did not even know the advocate who had filed the same. The advocate and his clerk were examined before the Magistrate. Thus, evidence of 14 witnesses were recorded. After considering the materials, the case was numbered as C. P. 4/97 and summons were issued against Sajimon. The said action is the subject matter of challenge in Criminal Miscellaneous Case under S.482 of the Code. When the matter was taken up it was found by learned Single Judge that the case involves some important questions of law and therefore it requires to be heard by a Division Bench.