P KUNHI BAVA Vs. THAZHEPURAM NABEESU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in a prosecution initiated against three persons (the second respondent herein is the third accused) under Sections 323, 506(II) and 302 read with 34 I.P.C. The said proceedings has been initiated against them by the first respondent herein. The first respondent is the mother of the deceased person - one Mujeeb by name. Cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate. The necessary enquiry was conducted. The second respondent/second petitioner herein did not participate in the enquiry. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, has committed accused 1 and 3 to the court of Session to face allegations interalia under Section 302 I.P.C. Both the petitioners have assailed the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate . The first petitioner assails the order of committal also. The second respondent has not entered appearance but the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the contentions urged would apply to the second respondent herein also who is the third accused who has also been committed to the court of Session as per the impugned order.

(2.) The crux of the allegations against the accused persons is that they, being Additional Sub Inspector of Police and Police Constables attached to the crime detection party of the Thalassery police station, in the course of investigation of a crime after apprehending two accused persons, went in search of the son of the complainant. He was traced. The said person Mujeeb took to his heals to escape from the police party. The police party consisting of the accused persons chased the said Mujeeb. While he was running away, he fell into a well. There is an allegation that he was pushed into the well. After he fell into the well, there was an attempt to get him out of the well. A heavy stone was allegedly thrown into the well by the members of the police party which allegedly hit the deceased on his head and he later succumbed to such injury suffered by him. These, in short, are the allegations raised.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the very cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate violates the mandates of Section 197 Cr.P.C and therefore the entire proceedings is bad and vitiated for want of the requisite sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel, in these circumstances, prays that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate may be set aside.