ABRAHAM Vs. THE SUB COLLECTOR, TUTICORIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner - Sub -Inspector of Police, Thattaparai Police Station is accused 1 in C.C. No. 407 of 1986 on the file of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Tuticorin. Against him and two others, accused 2 and 3, who were constables attached to the said Police Station, a private complaint had been preferred by the Respondent - -Sub Collector, Tuticorin for alleged of fences under Sections 177, 193 and 342 I.P.C. Learned Magistrate took the complaint on file and framed charges against accused 1 to 3 for offences under Sections 193, 218 and 342 I.P.C.

(2.) THE circumstances which led to the filing of the complaint are as follows: One Ganapathy Chettiar employed as a cook in the Senior Approved School at Thattaparai was stated to have assaulted accused 2 Constable on 5.9.1984 in the immediate presence of accused 3 who happened to witness the same, consequently, accused 2 preferred a complaint before accused 1 - Sub Inspector of Police, which was registered in Crime No. 74/84 and the subsequent investigation had been taken by the Inspector of Police. On completion of investigation a final report under Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure had been filed before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Tuticorin, in the sense of referring the case as 'mistake of fact and false'. Learned Magistrate accepted the report and closed the matter. Thereafter, the said Ganapathy Chettiar gave a petition to the Superintendent of the Senior Approved School, under whom he is working and he, in turn forwarded the same to the Collector, Tirunelveli for enquiry. The Collector, in turn, sent the petition to the Respondent - Sub Collector for enquiry. The Sub -Collector, after making an enquiry, came to the conclusion that a false case has been put up against this Ganapathy Chettiar and that he was wrongfully detained in the police station and later released on bail. Consequently, he preferred a complaint as stated above.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would submit that the complaint tiled as such by the Sub Collector, Tuticorin is not at all sustainable, on the face of the salient provisions adumbrated under Section 195, Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would however repel such a submission.