JIJI K BABU Vs. GANDHI RAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who is the complainant in C.C.No.579/2010 on the file of the J.F.C.M Court-III, Punalur, is aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, to receive the complaint which was returned by the J.F.C.M Court-III, Punalur as per Ext.P3 order dated 19.2.2010. The failure to receive the complaint by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court was not on the ground that, that court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, but according to the petitioner, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram refused to accept the complaint for the reason that the J.F.C.M Court-III, Punalur had already taken cognizance of the offence and hence, the complaint could not have been returned in exercise of the power under Section 201 Criminal Procedure Code If, that is the ground on which the complaint was refused to be accepted by the transferee Magistrate, it is clearly illegal. Section 201 Cr.P.C reads as follows:-

(2.) It is true that a reading of Section 201 Cr.P.C would indicate that the Magistrate, who is not competent to take cognizance of the offence should return the complaint for presentation to the proper Court thereby meaning that the return should be prior to the act of taking cognizance of the offence. But even under the provision of the old code corresponding to Section 201 Criminal Procedure Code, the view taken by a Full Bench of this Court in State v. Pokker, 1958 KerLT 911was that the power under Section 201 Cr.P.C can be exercised even at the post cognizance stage. The above position has been reiterated in Abdul Azeez Nazeem v. Radhakrishnan, 2002 2 KerLT 23, which was a decision rendered under the present code. Hence, the complaint could not have been refused to be accepted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, merely for the reason that cognizance of the offence had already been taken by the Transferor Court. But, it is made clear that this will not preclude the transferee Magistrate to refuse to entertain the complaint, if that Court also does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. This writ petition is disposed of as above.