PRASANTH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is instituted seeking orders quashing the final report and all further proceedings in CC.No.826 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Vadakara.

(2.) The case aforesaid is one instituted upon a police report under Sections 341, 353 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is the sole accused in the case. The accusation against the accused in the case as disclosed in the First Information Statement given by the de facto complainant is that on 18.01.2018, while the de facto complainant, a women Civil Police Officer was on escort duty of one Afifa, a person accused in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act pending before the Special Court, Vadakara, the accused attempted to converse with the prisoner in the premises of the special court and since the court proceedings was about to commence by that time, the de facto complainant prevented the accused from conversing with the prisoner. It was also alleged that later on the same day, while the de facto complainant was waiting at the bus stand with the prisoner for proceeding to another court, the accused attempted to converse with the prisoner again and the de facto complainant prevented him from doing so. It was also alleged that later, when de facto complainant boarded a bus along with the prisoner, the accused accompanied the prisoner in the bus as well for the said purpose stating that he is the lawyer of the prisoner and that he has the right to converse with the prisoner. The de facto complainant prevented him from doing so again for the purpose of ensuring the safe journey of the prisoner. It was further alleged that later after the Court proceedings, the accused appeared before them again and when the de facto complainant permitted the accused to converse with the prisoner having realised that he is the lawyer of the prisoner, the accused pushed the woman Civil Police Officer who was accompanying the de facto complainant aside and proceeded refusing to converse with the prisoner shouting that he has other means to converse with the prisoner and he does not want the concessions of the de facto complainant for the said purpose. The case of the accused is that the accusation does not make out the offences alleged.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Public Prosecutor.