DILEEP Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a proceeding initiated under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking to quash Annexure-A5 protest complaint in C.C.No.4786/2013 on the file of JFCM-II, Ernakulam, instituted for prosecution of the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 340 , 351 , 506 read with Section 34 IPC.

(2.) He is the first accused in the complaint. The third respondent who filed the complaint is a person interested in the affairs of Chittoor Sree Krishna Swami temple. He filed litigations against the adjacent land owners for measurement and demarcation of temple land with a view to clear the encroachments made into Devaswom property. The petitioner is one of the neighbouring land owners. The allegation against the petitioner and co- accused is that on 30.1.2013 at 9 p.m., while third respondent was walking to his house, all the four accused wrongfully restrained him when he reached near the property of the petitioner and criminally intimidated him demanding withdrawal of cases against the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner seeks to quash Annexure-A5 complaint on the premise that it is a concocted case purportedly brought into existence against him by the third respondent. It is stated that the third respondent has vengeance against the petitioner since he is a witness to an incident which happened on 30.1.2013 itself at 8 p.m. near the temple property and in front of an NSS auditorium where the second accused in Annexure-A5 complaint had been wrongfully restrained by the third respondent and intimidated. The third respondent further used abusive words also against the second accused. Following Annexure-A1 complaint initiated by the second accused against the third respondent and consequential investigation, he was charge sheeted before JFCM, Ernakulam, for commission of offences punishable under Sections 340 , 351 , 506 read with Section 34 IPC. Annexure-A2 crime registered against this petitioner and co- accused in respect of the incident that occurred on 30.1.2013 at 9 p.m. near the property of the petitioner was, however, referred as false by Annexure-A4 final report. Annexure-A5 protest complaint thus filed challenging Annexure-A4 report, according to the petitioner, was without any basis whatsoever and only out of third respondent's personal grudge against him.