JOMON PUTHENPURACKAL Vs. JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE III

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the complainant in C. M. P. 3157/2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Thiruvananthapuram. He filed the above complaint in Court alleging that the accused in that complaint committed the offences under Ss. 465 and 468 read with S. 120b of the indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate commenced proceedings under S. 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(2.) THE learned Magistrate issued summons to the second respondent in this petition, who is the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of kerala, for production of documents. It is stated that the summons was not accepted by the Speaker and it was returned. Regarding the issuance of summons to the second respondent for production of documents he made statements to the press which, according to the petitioner, will amount to contempt of Court. THE statement alleged to have been made by the second respondent reported in malayala Manorama daily dated 16th September, 2003 is extracted in the petition. THE report in the newspaper was that no Magistrate who knows things will not make such a demand and that anybody, who had read the Constitution of india, will not make such a demand to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly.

(3.) IN this Writ Petition the petitioner says that the intention of the second respondent was to bring into ridicule and contempt the image of the judiciary as a whole, which is clear from other references made against the High Court and the Chief Justice. The petitioner would say that the statement made by the second respondent was motivated with the object of ridiculing the judges and judiciary in the eye of the public and thereby making people lose faith in the entire system.