LAWS(KER)-2010-11-418

SASI T R Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On November 01, 2010
SASI T. R. Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant in a private complaint is the revision petitioner as he is aggrieved by the order of the learned Magistrate in not taking cognizance under S.324 and S.326 read with S.34 IPC against the second accused.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner and I have perused the order of the learned Magistrate.

(3.) The case of the revision petitioner is that the accused three in number criminally trespassed into the Court yard of the petitioner at 4.30 p.m. on 25/10/2009 and the second accused inflicted a beating on the back of the petitioner with a wooden piece causing contusion and abrasion on the back. It is also the case that the first accused has beaten the brother of the petitioner on his right foot causing fracture. The further allegation is that the third accused caught hold of the hair of the wife of the petitioner and inflicted beatings on her face and while she fell down, applied his foot several times causing contusion and pain. According to the petitioner, the injured including the petitioner, his brother and wife were treated in the Government Hospital, Mavelikkara. It is the further case of the petitioner that though Crime No. 350 of 2009 was registered in the Police Station for the offence punishable under S.452, S.323 and S.34 IPC, the Police subsequently referred the crime and aggrieved by the above approach of the Police, the petitioner preferred CMP No. 1938 of 2010 against the three accused / respondents 2 to 4 herein. But, the learned Magistrate, after examination of the witnesses under S.202, had taken the complaint on file as CC No. 315 of 2010 against the first and third accused alone, that too for the offences punishable under S.324 and S.326 IPC read with S.34 IPC. The complaint is dismissed under S.203 of the CrPC, so far as the offence under S.452 is concerned and also dismissed the complaint under S.203 CrPC so far as the second accused is concerned. It is the above order which is under challenge in this Criminal Revision Petition.