G SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are the accused in C.C. 56/2001 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Paravoor and this petition is filed for quashing the first information report registered in the crime and also the charge sheet submitted in Court. The allegation is that on 12-3-1999 the petitioners conducted first works in Puttungal Bhagavathi Temple at about 8.30 p.m. ignoring the objections raised by the police who were there in the temple premises and thereby committed offences under S.9 - B (1) (b) of the Explosives Act and S.353 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The first petitioner is the President of Paravoor Pattungal Devaswom Karayogam and the other petitioners are Office bearers of the Karayogam which manages the affairs of the temple. Now the temple is being managed by the Official Receiver appointed by the District Court, Kollam. There was a suit regarding the administration of this temple and the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal held that the temple has to be managed by the Nair Groups of the four karas. The dispute was mainly between the Nair Karakkars and people belonging to other communities among Hindus. In 1997 an original petition was filed in this Court by petitioners 1 and 2 and another person by name Parameswaran Pillai for prohibiting fire works being conducted by the Secretary of Meena Bharani Utsavaghosha Committee and that original petition was allowed with a direction to the District Collector, Kollam to take appropriate and suitable action for the contravention of any of the provisions of the Explosives Act.

(3.) According to the petitioners, they are falsely implicated in the crime at the instance of the members of the rival group. The petitioners would contend that their names were not in the first information report and they were made accused only in the final report filed in Court. It is not necessary that the names of all person, who committed the offences, have to be there in the first information report. The first information report is prepared at the time of registering the crime on the basis of the Information received regarding the commission of the offence and it is quite probable that during investigation the names of the persons, who committed the offence, would be revealed. As and when the investigating agency gets materials to show that a particular person committed the offence usually report is sent to Court giving the name and address of the person who committed the offence. There is nothing wrong in mentioning in the final report the names of persons as accused whose names were not there in the first information report. Final report cannot be said to be illegal for the reason that the persons mentioned in the final report as accused are not mentioned in the first information report as accused.