K.G.VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1267 of 2013 of Poojappura Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (the IPC ). This Crl.M.C. is instituted invoking the power of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) seeking orders quashing Annexure-XLVII final report in the said case which is now pending trial before the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram in C.C.No.802 of 2014.

(2.) The petitioner who is a Government servant was working on deputation as Administrative Officer in the Kerala State Horticultural Products Development Corporation Ltd. (Horticorp) between 01.01.2013 to 19.11.2013. The third respondent was the Accounts Officer and the fourth respondent was a daily wage employee of Horticorp during the relevant period. The crime referred to above was registered on the basis of the complaints of respondents 3 and 4 forwarded to the Police by the then Managing Director of Horticorp. Annexure-XXI is the letter addressed to the Station House Officer, Poojappura by the then Managing Director of Horticorp on 19.11.2013 in terms of which complaints of respondents 3 and 4 were forwarded. After the registration of the crime, statements of respondents 3 and 4 were recorded under Section 164 of the Code and the final report sought to be quashed, has been filed based on the said statements. The case set out by the petitioner in the Crl.M.C. is that even if the statements of respondents 3 and 4 recorded under Section 164 of the Code are accepted as true, a case under Section 354 of the IPC is not made out in the said statements. It is also the case of the petitioner that criminal proceedings have been initiated maliciously against him at the instance of the then Managing Director of the Horticorp who had an axe to grind against him.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the second respondent, the then Managing Director of Horticorp as also the learned Public Prosecutor. There was no appearance for respondents 3 and 4.