JAYADEVA PANICKER Vs. VELAYUDHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complainant in a criminal case sought the assistance of the court to get a document searched out from the custody of one of the accused. The court declined to extend its assistance to the complainant. Hence that complainant has approached this Court with a petition under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code"). The complainant will be referred to hereinafter as the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner filed the complaint against ten persons, accusing them of different offences and the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences under S.463, 464 and 471 read with S.34 of the I.P.C. The allegations in the complaint are not relevant for consideration at this stage, and hence I do not narrate them here. During the pendency of the case the petitioner filed an application for giving a direction to the Assistant Registrar of a Cooperative Society (for short 'Society') to produce some records. Pursuant to the summons issued to the said Assistant Registrar, he appeared in court and submitted that the required records are not within his powers and control. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the second application praying for the issue of a search warrant to search out the documents. It is mentioned in the application, that those documents are being kept in the office room of the Society which is under the control of its Secretary. The learned Magistrate dismissed the said application. Hence the complainant filed the present petition for invoking powers under S.482 of the Code.

(3.) The Secretary of the Society is one of the accused in the complaint. The learned Magistrate dismissed the second application mainly on the ground that the petitioner should have approached the Joint Registrar of the Society and requested him to take further action. The Magistrate expressed doubt in the bona fides of the petitioner in filing the said application.