VARGHESE Vs. JOY, AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As common questions arise in both these petitions, they are heard together. Petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.1452 of 2016 preferred a protest complaint against the action of the investigating officer filing a negative report against the party respondent. Petitioner in Crl. R.P. No.1185 of 2015, who is the accused in Crime No.524 of 2011 of Kalady Police Station, has approached this Court challenging the order passed by the Magistrate concerned taking cognizance on the protest complaint filed by the petitioner in Crl. R.P. No.1452 of 2016.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel on both sides. Learned Public Prosecutor is also heard.

(3.) Petitioner in Crl. R.P. No.1452 of 2016 preferred a complaint before the police alleging offences punishable under Sections 308, 323, 324 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code (in short, "IPC") against the petitioner in Crl.R.P.No.1185 of 2015. After investigation, the police filed a refer report. Then the petitioner approached the Magistrate having jurisdiction and filed a protest complaint, which is marked as Annexure-A2 in Crl. R.P. No.1185 of 2015. The learned Magistrate took cognizance on the protest complaint as per Annexure-A3 order. The offences for which cognizance was taken are punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC. Accused/petitioner in Crl. R.P. No.1185 of 2015 is aggrieved by this action on the part of the court below and the complainant challenges the order stating that grave offences alleged have been omitted.