KURIAKOSE CHACKO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application to revise an order the Stationary First Class Magistrate, Moovattupuzha, passed in P.E. No. 17 of 1124, on the file of his Court overruling an objection of the accused that the prosecution against him is premature. The charge is that the accused harboured an 'offender' and thereby committed an offence punishable under S. 207, Travancore Penal Code. The preliminary objection raised before the Magistrate was that as the 'offender' concerned has not been apprehended or tried or convicted, the present prosecution is premature. It would appear that there are as many as four cases pending against that 'offender'. Apparently the learned Magistrate would seem to have been of the view that the objection was without substance and his order is that the question can be considered only at the close of the prosecution evidence. Reading the order as a whole it is however doubtful whether it was the consideration of the preliminary point raised that was deferred. The revision is directed against the order to proceed with the enquiry.

(2.) The prayer made before me was that the enquiry may be directed to be stayed until after the trial of the offender himself. Prima facie the request for stay is reasonable and supported by precedents. In Palani Goundan v. Emperor - 1937 MWN 21 K.S. Menon, J. held that the contention that the trial of the petitioner therein under S.212 I.P.C. (Travancore S.207) should be stayed until after the trial of the persons whom he is said to have harboured had considerable force and accordingly directed the stay of the trial.

(3.) In this state of the authorities I think the prayer that the trial of the case against the petitioner be stayed until after the disposal of at least one of the cases against the concerned offender is reasonable and I order accordingly.