MONCY P.ALEXANDER Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defacto complainant in Crime No.219 of 2015 of Peruvanthanam Police Station now pending as S.C.No.685 of 2017 of the Sessions Court, Thodupuzha for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 188, 353, 333 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code is the petitioner herein.

(2.) According to the prosecution, petitioner was functioning as Additional District Magistrate, Kottayam in the year 2015. On 26.06.2015 in W.P(C).No.19214 of 2015, this Court had directed the petitioners therein to keep a disputed gate open and that, they shall not collect any toll during the pendency of the writ petition. It seems that, regarding the closure of gate, there were disputes pending between the management of the tea estate and locals who claimed right of passage through the road. The order was directed to be implemented with police aid. The District Collector by his communication dated 02.07.2015 addressed to the District Police Chief requested him to provide necessary and adequate police protection to the ADM who was deputed to implement the order. Accordingly, on 03.07.2015, ADM accompanied by the local DYSP, revenue officials and other police personnel reached the spot. When they took steps to re-fix the gate, second respondent herein who was the local MLA of the Peerumade constituency along with 300 other persons came to the spot and obstructed the official discharge of duties by the officials and the police personnel. Petitioners though explained about the orders of the High Court, second respondent allegedly assaulted the ADM, shouted at him, pushed him to one side and assaulted him. ADM fell down and sustained injuries. He was assaulted by the remaining persons in the presence of police officers. He was immediately rushed to the hospital, wherein, it was reported that, he had sustained fracture of the fibula. Petitioner was treated at the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. A report was given by him to the District Collector. Crime was registered against the second respondent and 52 other named persons. After completion of investigation, final report was laid and the matter is now pending trial before the Sessions Court.

(3.) Petitioner has approached this Court contending that the second respondent is very powerful and highly influential in Thodupuzha area and is also an MLA of the ruling coalition. After the registration of crime, petitioner got several threatening calls and messages informing him that, he will not be permitted to give evidence against the MLA. According to the petitioner, if the trial is proceeded before the District Court, Thodupuzha, there is every possibility that the trial will be sabotaged and all the witnesses in support of him will be threatened or coerced. Hence, he sought for transfer of the case from Sessions Court, Thodupuzha to any other Court in the Sessions division of Ernakulam/Thrissur in the interest of justice.