LAWS(KER)-2019-6-49

RAJESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On June 07, 2019
RAJESH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 and 2 as per Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.495/2019 of Thenmala Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 427, 451 r/w.34 of IPC.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that the petitioners along with the other co-accused had caused willful hurt and injuries as a result of their enemity towards the lady defacto complainant by trespassing into her house at about 8.30 p.m. on 25.4.2019 and that the petitioners had pushed the lady's husband and had caused hurt and that the lady had also caused hurt while attempting to stop the unlawful acts of the petitioners and that thereby committed the above said offences. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that in the course of investigation, an additional report has been filed by the Police before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court concerned, whereby additional offence as per Section 354 of IPC has also been incorporated in the above said crime.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would point out that the said allegations are falsely foisted on the petitioners by the lady defacto complainant and her husband and that the wife of the 1st petitioner has caused the registration of Annexure-A4 Crime N0.496/2019 of Thenmala Police Station, in which the present lady defacto complainant's husband Joseph had been arrayed as accused therein for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and 505(2) of IPC. That the said incidents in relation to Annexure-A4 had occurred at around 18 hours on 24.4.2019 and that it is only to wriggle out of the said crime that the lady defacto complainant has raised false allegations which led to the registration of the instant Annexure-A1 crime, wherein the petitioners have been arrayed as accused. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioners would point out that even going by the First Information Statement in the instant crime, no offence under Section 354 of IPC has been disclosed and the only allegation was that when the accused tried to cause hurt on the lady's husband, she had intervened and then she had also hurt etc and that the said allegations do not even remotely disclose any premeditated mens rea or intention on the part of the accused to outrage the modesty of the lady. That the Police have now added the offence as per Section 354 of IPC in the instant crime only to strengthen the false case of the defacto complainant. It appears that no serious injuries are disclosed in this case except minor abrasions.