Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 1062 (KER)

D. STALIN v. STATE OF KERALA

2024-08-23

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

body2024
ORDER : 1. This criminal miscellaneous case is filed to quash Annexure-1 complaint, which is pending as S.T. No. 412/2010 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam. It is a complaint filed based on an order passed under Section 340(1) read with Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.P.C.). 2. The case against the petitioner is that, he, being the judgment debtor in E.P.No. 231/2008 before the Principal Munsiff Court, Kollam, was arrested by the Amin of the Court on 24.08.2009 at 10 am in pursuance of the warrant issued by the learned Munsiff under Order XXI Rule 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure. After the arrest, he was brought to the nazarate by the Amin, but he ran away and escaped from the lawful custody of the Amin. The Amin could not successfully resist or take the custody of the petitioner. Subsequently on the same day, after the case was called in court, the petitioner surrendered before the Court at 2.30 pm. On his appearance, the decree holder deposited jail batta, and the petitioner was ordered by the learned Munsiff to be sent to civil jail for 30 days, for which his custody was given to the same Amin. Later, at around 3.40 pm, the Amin again reported that the petitioner escaped from his lawful custody and thus obstructed the lawful functioning of the Amin, a public servant functioning under the orders of the Court. On the basis of the report of the Amin, the learned Munsiff registered M.C. No. 3/2009 against the petitioner under Section 340(1) read with Section 195 Cr.P.C. After conducting the necessary enquiry, the learned Magistrate found that the offences under Sections 186, 225B and 353 IPC are made out. Hence Annexure-1 complaint was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam. Aggrieved by the same, this criminal miscellaneous case is filed. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. According to the petitioner, even if the entire allegations in Annexure-1 complaint are accepted, no offence is made out. Hence it is submitted that the continuation of Annexure-1 is an abuse of the process of the court. 5. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against Annexure-1 complaint is not maintainable. Hence it is submitted that the continuation of Annexure-1 is an abuse of the process of the court. 5. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner. I am of the considered opinion that a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against Annexure-1 complaint is not maintainable. Section 340 Cr.P.C. deals about the procedure in cases mentioned in Section 195 Cr.P.C. Section 341 Cr.P.C. deals about the appeal. It will be better to extract Section 341 Cr.PC: “341. Appeal: (1) Any person on whose application any Court other than a High Court has refused to make a complaint under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 340, or against whom such a complaint has been made by such Court, may appeal to the Court to which such former Court is subordinate within the meaning of sub-section (4) of Section 195, and the superior Court may thereupon, after notice to the parties concerned, direct the withdrawal of the complaint, or, as the case may be, making of the complaint which such former Court might have made under Section 340, and if it makes such complaint, the provisions of that section shall apply accordingly. (2) An order under this section, and subject to any such order, an order under Section 340, shall be final, and shall not be subject to revision.” 6. As per Section 341 Cr.P.C., an appeal is maintainable at the instance of the following persons: (a) Any person on whose application any Court other than a High Court has refused to make a complaint under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 340. (b) Any person, against whom such a complaint has been made by such Court. 7. From the above it is clear that if a complaint has been made by a Court as per Section 340 Cr.P.C. the person against whom the complaint is filed has a right to file an appeal under Section 341 Cr.P.C. Section 341(2) Cr.P.C. says that, an order under this section, and subject to any such order, an order under Section 340, shall be final, and shall not be subject to revision. 8. The contention of the petitioner is that Annexure-1 complaint is not maintainable and no offence is made out in Annexure-1 complaint. 8. The contention of the petitioner is that Annexure-1 complaint is not maintainable and no offence is made out in Annexure-1 complaint. But when an appeal can be filed under Section 341 Cr.P.C. by a person against whom such a complaint has been made, he can raise all contentions in such an appeal including the maintainability of the offence alleged in the complaint. Therefore when an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, this Court need not invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash Annexure-1 complaint. It is settled law that when an appeal is maintainable unless there are extraordinary situations, this Court need not invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore, in this case, when the petitioner has a right of appeal under Section 341 Cr.P.C, this Court need not entertain this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 9. But in the facts and circumstances of the case, I make it clear that if an appeal is filed under Section 341 Cr.P.C. against Annexure-1 complaint before the jurisdictional court within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the jurisdictional appellate court will exclude the time during which this criminal miscellaneous case was pending before this Court, while computing limitation period if any. All the contentions raised by the petitioner in this case are left open and he is free to agitate the same before the appellate court or before the jurisdictional court at the appropriate stage in accordance with law. 10. With these observations, this criminal miscellaneous case is disposed of. 11. Registry shall return the Trial Court Records forthwith.