M V RAJEEV Vs. N KRISHNANKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is the complainant in C.C.No.865 of 2001 as he is aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.7.2006 of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-Perumbavoor in the above case, since the learned Magistrate acquitted the sole accused under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. who faced the prosecution for the offence punishable under section 342, 323, 324 and 325 of IPC.

(2.) THE case of the complainant, who is examined as PW1, is that on 12.1.2000 at about 5.30 a.m., the accused who was the then Sub Inspector of police, Perumbavoor police station and seven police men came to the residence of the complainant and trespassed into the bed room of the complainant searching for him and thereafter he was taken into the police jeep stating that there was a case against the complainant. According to the complainant, though he asked to disclose the details of the case, the details were not furnished to him. It is also the case of the complainant that, thereafter the accused and other policemen were proceeded to the houses of Pws.2 and 3 and they were also forcibly taken to the jeep and all of them brought to the police station. According to the complainant, Pws.1 to 3 were taken to the office room of the accused where the complainant was shown a notice and enquired him whether he was the author of the same. It is the further case of the complainant that when he denied the paternity of that notice, he was brutally tortured and Pws.2 and 3 were also manhandled.

(3.) ACCORDING to PW1, though he had preferred a complaint in the court on 18.1.2000, the same was transmitted to the Circle Inspector of police, Perumbavoor under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. who in turn registered crime no.42/2000 in the Perumbavoor police station but by report dated 29.3.2000, the police had referred the above crime. Therefore, the complainant had preferred the present complaint as a protest against the dropping of the case by the police and thus the present protest complaint was filed on 5.4.2000.