KANHOLI MUKUNDAN NAMBIAR Vs. K.V. SATISH NAMBIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in C.C. No. 393/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur have filed this petition for quashing the proceedings under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code').

(2.) IT is alleged in the petition that the petitioners were arrayed as accused in C.C. No. 393/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur on the basis of Annexure -I private complaint filed by the first respondent as complainant alleging offences under sections 447, 353, 193, 201 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. After taking the sworn statement, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the case as C.C. No. 393/2013 only for the offences under sections 447 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code. The first respondent has already filed Annexure -III suit as O.S. No. 265/2012 before the Sub Court, Thalassery for fixation of boundary, injunction and recovery of possession and that is pending. Earlier the petitioners filed Annexure -IV complaint dated 17.9.2012 before the Mattannur police station with a copy to the Director General of Police, Superintendent of Police, Chief Minister of Kerala, President of India, Prime Minister of India and National Human Rights Commission and on receipt of Annexure -IV complainant, the Director General of Police directed the subordinate officers to conduct an enquiry regarding the same and Annexure -VI report was filed stating that the complaint was baseless and filed with ulterior motive. The allegation that the petitioners have encroached the property etc is not correct. Further, even assuming that the entire allegations in the complaint are accepted, the documents produced will go to show that the petitioners are in possession of the property and whether they have got right to possess the property etc is a matter to be considered by the civil court in the civil suit filed by the first respondent and it is purely of civil nature and no criminal offence is attracted and allowing the case to continue will amount to an abuse of process of court. So the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) HEARD the counsel for the petitioners, the 1st respondent and the Public Prosecutor.