USHA Vs. INDIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner, who is a lady by a name Usha is the de facto complainant in Crime No. 7/2005 of Viyyur Police Station for an offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Schedule Caste Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(2.) The case of the revision petitioner is that she, who is working as programme executive in All India Radio (Akasavani), was insulted by calling her caste name by the accused who is also a lady and employed as programme executive in the All India Radio and the accused thereby committed offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Said Act. After investigation, the DYSP, Thrissur filed a charge sheet before Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thrissur. The said Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and registered the case as C.P. 14/2005. After completing the committal proceedings and complying with Section 207 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Session in exercise of his power under Section 209 Cr.P.C. The case was registered as Sessions Case No. 694/2005 before the Principal Sessions Court, Thrissur which is the special court under the aforesaid Act. While so, the accused moved the Superintendent of Police, Thrissur for further investigation. Accordingly, the Superintendent of Police, Thrissur ordered the DYSP to conduct further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. After seeking permission from the trial court, he conducted further investigation and filed a supplementary report in the form of a refer report to the effect that the case was a false case. Upon receipt of notice of the refer report, the revision petitioner/de facto complainant appeared before the Sessions Court and submitted that the further investigation allegedly conducted was false and mala fide and requested the court to take cognizance of the offence by referring to the materials on record. That court however, as per the impugned order dated 25-07-2007 treated the sessions case as closed and discharged the accused holding that that was the only course open to that court. It is the said order which is assailed in this revision.

(3.) Even though the 1st respondent/accused w as duly served, she has not chosen to enter appearance in this revision.