T.SAJEEV Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.478/2019 of Ezhukone Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Sections 451, 341, 354, 354D and 509 of the IPC. The abovesaid crime has been registered on 30.3.2019 on the basis of the FIS given by the lady defacto complainant on the 30.3.2019, in respect of the alleged incidents which has occurred on 28.3.2019.

(2.) The gist of the prosecution case is that, with the intention to defame and create mental stress to the lady defacto complainant, the accused on a day in Feb., 2012, had criminally trespassed into the residence of the said lady and had caught hold of her, and further that for about last 2 years prior to Dec., 2018, the petitioner has been constantly troubling her, and that on 28.3.2019 at about 10.15 am when the lady defact complainant had reached the reached the place near the timber mill, the petitioner accused who had come in a scooter had stopped and caught hold on her hand, and directed her to come to the SNDP Office, of which he is the Secretary. Later the lady defacto complainant had gone to the office of the petitioner at 11 am, another person was also sitting along with the accused and the petitioner had shown certain obscene gesticulations and gestures to her, which was not seen by the other person sitting in the room and then she had slapped the petitioner on his face using her slipper, etc.

(3.) It is pointed out by Sri.A.N.Rajan Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, the abovesaid allegations are all falsely foisted against him by the lady defacto complainant. The petitioner is the Secretary of the SNDP Yogam Sagha, Ezhukone, and also the Secretary of the Sree Mahadeva Temple in that place, and the lady's brother had earlier assaulted the petitioner's brother and thereafter the lady's brother and others had come to the petitioner's house and had assaulted and beaten him, against which the petitioner has given a complaint and a crime has been registered in that regard. The said incidents occurred 3 or 4 months back, and further that some persons interested to consider a marriage proposal for the lady had approached the petitioner to ascertain whether they should proceed further with the marriage proposal, and the petitioner informed them, that the lady's family is not co-operating with the SNDP Sagha in making their regular contributions, etc and this aspect was known to the lady, which infuriated her as the said persons had dropped the marriage proposal which motivated her to make the present false allegation.