R. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In C.C. No.203 of 2012 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram ordered issuance of summons to the petitioners under Sec. 204 Crimial P.C., 1973 which is challenged in these petitions. The criminal law was set in motion by the second respondent, who filed Annexure-I complaint before the learned Magistrate alleging commission of the offences under Sections 86(1) and 86(2) of the Kerala Prisons And Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Crl.M.C. No.1236 of 2018

(2.) Petitioner is the first accused. In one case the Supreme Court convicted him, who is a former Minister, of an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for a certain term. He was lodged in Central Prison, Poojappura (Thiruvananthapuram). From there he was shifted to a private hospital at Thiruvananthapuram for treatment of certain illness on 5.8.2011. It is stated in the complaint that on 29.11.2011 at the hospital a reporter of a television channel called him on his mobile phone; the second accused handed over the mobile phone to him, who talked to the reporter on the phone; the jail authorities received complaints in connection with this incident; they took action against the petitioner only for the offence under Sec. 81 of the Act though the facts reveal commission of the offences under Sections 86(1) and 86(2) of the Act also.

(3.) The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences mentioned in the complaint and conducted enquiry and issued process to 204 persons though there are only two named accused in the complaint, the first of whom being the petitioner. In this Crl.M.C. the order taking cognizance is challenged on the following grounds: (i) only the jail authorities can initiate proceedings against the petitioner (ii) the petitioner did not use mobile phone as alleged in the complaint, and (iii) the facts of the case do not constitute any offence.