VINOD Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition is filed challenging Exhibit P6 order dtd. 30/1/2014 by the State Police Complaints Authority (hereinafter referred to as "the Authority" ) on a complaint filed by the 4th respondent against the petitioners herein alleging assault and registration of a false case against him.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the present writ petition are as follows: Petitioners are police officials who are respondents 1 to 4 in O.P No. 97 of 2013 before the State Police Complaints Authority. The averment in Exhibit P1 complaint before the Authority is that on 17/2/2013 the 4th respondent herein was riding a motorcycle bearing Registration No. KL 01 V 5686 along with his friend without wearing a helmet and when he reached near the police check post where the 2nd petitioner along with police party was checking the vehicles, one policeman asked him to stop the bike all of a sudden and that the 3rd petitioner caught hold on the handle of the bike which resulted in the bike getting accelerated and thereby hit the 3rd petitioner and he along with the 4th respondent fell down. Thereupon, petitioners assaulted the 4th respondent and his friend. Thereafter, a crime was registered against the 4th respondent and his friend as Crime No. 172 of 2013 of Kazhakootam Police Station alleging commission of offences punishable under Ss. 279, 332, 427 and 34 IPC r/w Sec. 188 (3) (1) and 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Later Exhibit P11 final report was filed in the said crime before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Attingal. It is the case of the petitioners that Exhibit P1 complaint before the State Police Complaints Authority is a false one and it is only an attempt of the 4th respondent to wriggle out from the criminal prosecution. Detailed written statements were filed by the petitioners before the Authority as Exhibit P2 to P5. It is contended that the Authority without considering the contentions raised by the petitioners and without appreciating the evidence adduced in its correct perspective, held as per Exhibit P6 order dtd. 30/1/2014 that the 4th respondent suffered bodily harm at the hands of the petitioners and that his mobile was misappropriated and therefore directed to register a criminal case against the petitioners under Ss. 323, 324, 325, 403, r/w 34 IPC. It was further ordered that Crime No. 172 of 2013 wherein the 4th respondent is arrayed as an accused has to be reinvestigated by the CBCID. It is aggrieved by Exhibit P6 order of the Authority that the present writ petition is filed. Even though this writ petition was filed as early as 2014, no counter affidavit is seen filed by any of the respondents.

(3.) Heard Shri. Suman Chakravarthy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Shiny Mol, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also Shri. Shajin. S. Hameed, learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent.