N.B. CHANDRAMOHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is a practicing advocate. He has filed the above petition to quash Annexure - B FIR registered in Crime No. 963/10 of Kollam West Police Station, as an abuse of the process of Court invoking the inherent powers of this Court under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'). That crime was registered on the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kollam on a complaint filed by the Sheristadar of the District Court, Kollam. In a case pending on the file of Additional Sessions Court - Ill, Kollam SC No. 1459/07, petitioner appeared for the 1st accused. To enlarge that accused on bail, some documents were produced to establish the identity of the accused and also his sureties. Petitioner, advocate of that accused, had attested such documents as genuine. Later, it was found that the documents produced before the Court as attested copies of originals were not genuine. That led to filing of a complaint by the Sheristadar against the aforesaid accused person, his sureties and also the advocate, the petitioner, pursuant to orders passed by the Court concerned directing to do so.

(2.) Annexure - A is copy of the complaint. The learned Magistrate receiving Annexure - A complaint directed the Sub-Inspector of Police, West Police Station, Kollam, to take cognizance of the offence and to investigate. Thereupon, the complaint being forwarded to the Sub-Inspector of Police, he registered the crime under Annexure - B FIR and the investigation of that crime is now in progress. Petitioner has filed the petition to quash Annexure - B FIR.

(3.) Annexure - A complaint filed by the Sheristadar of the Court imputed of allegations constituting contempt of lawful authority interfering with the administration of justice by production of false and fabricated documents before the Court. When that be so, cognizance of such an offence is governed by S.195(b)(i) and (ii) of the Code. When such a complaint is filed before any Court can the Magistrate without taking cognizance refer such complaint for investigation by police is the question that emerges for consideration. Such reference, made, and sanction accorded by the Magistrate to conduct investigation after taking cognizance of offence, is patently erroneous and unsustainable. When such complaint is filed, the Magistrate, after taking cognizance, has to proceed with in accordance with law. He may conduct an enquiry under S.202 of the Code before issuing process to the accused, if need be. Otherwise, he has to proceed with the enquiry as provided by law issuing summons to the accused, having regard to the nature of the offences imputed in the complaint. The direction / order passed by the learned Magistrate in the present case, according sanction to the Sub-Inspector of Police, to register a crime and proceed with the case is illegal. Even if a report is filed by the Magistrate after investigation indicting the accused of any offence on such report, Magistrate cannot take cognizance of the offence, but only on the complaint filed originally before that Court.