Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 856 (KER)

Girija v. Karthika

2024-07-15

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

body2024
ORDER : This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash the proceedings in Annexure-A FIR. Annexure-A is the FIR in Crime No.1270/2018 of Thrikkakkara Police Station. The above case is registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the 1st respondent alleging offences punishable under Sections 326, 324, 307 and 308 IPC and Section 3 (1)(g), 3(1)(r) & 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015. The case is registered based on an incident allegedly happened in the year 2011 and the crime is registered in the year 2018. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 03.01.2011, at about 1 p.m., the accused trespassed into the property belonging to the defacto complainant's sister in law and assaulted her using a stick and chopper. It was also alleged that the accused called their caste name and they were criminally intimidated by the defacto complainant and others. Annexure-A is the FIR. It is submitted that in respect of the very same incident narrated in Annexure-A, the Police registered Crime No.26/2011 and a final report was also submitted alleging offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 447 r/w 34 of IPC. The same is pending as C.C. No.984/2015 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad. Annexure-B is the FIR in Crime No.26/2011 and Annexure-C is the final report in Crime No.26/2011. It is submitted that an application was filed by the defacto complainant seeking further investigation in the above case. Annexure-D is the application filed by the defacto complainant for further investigation. The same was dismissed as evident by Annexure-E. It is submitted that the first respondent, supressing all the material facts, preferred a private complaint before the Special Court for SC & ST (POA) Act cases and based on the same Annexure-A crime was registered. It is submitted that, the continuation of Annexure-A FIR is an abuse of process of court. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. I also heard the counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. 4. It is an admitted fact that a criminal case is registered against the petitioner by the Thrikkakara police as evident by Annexure-B FIR. After investigation, a final report was filed in that case as evident by Annexure-C. The offence alleged in Annexure-C are under Sections 323, 324, 447 r/w 34 IPC. 4. It is an admitted fact that a criminal case is registered against the petitioner by the Thrikkakara police as evident by Annexure-B FIR. After investigation, a final report was filed in that case as evident by Annexure-C. The offence alleged in Annexure-C are under Sections 323, 324, 447 r/w 34 IPC. Aggrieved by the investigation in that case, the 1st respondent filed Annexure-D petition for further investigation under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C. That petition was dismissed by the learned Magistrate as per order dated 30.09.2016 as evident by Annexure-E. Annexure-E order became final. After Annexure-E order dated 30.09.2016, Annexure-A FIR is registered based on the complaint of the 1st respondent on 05.10.2018 with the same set of facts in Annexure-B FIR. In addition to the allegation in Annexure B, the offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act is also alleged. I am of the considered opinion that the continuation of Annexure-A FIR is an abuse of process of court because there cannot be two FIR on same set of facts. This is a settled legal position. Based on Annexure-B FIR, investigation was conducted and Annexure-C final report is filed and the matter is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate court, Kakkanad. If the 1st respondent wants to adduce evidence in that case, the 1st respondent can adduce evidence stating that there are other offences also. Instead of doing that the 1st respondent filed another complaint before the Special Court under the SC/ST (POA) Act and the same was forwarded to the police and consequently Annexure-A FIR is registered. I am of the considered opinion that, Annexure-A FIR need not be continued because it is a second F.I.R. on the same set of facts. But I make it clear that the petitioner can adduce evidence in the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate based on Annexure-C final report. If the examination of the 1st respondent is over in that case and if any application is filed for further examination, the learned Magistrate will consider the same and allow the same in the interest of justice. Based on the further evidence, the learned Magistrate can proceed in accordance with law. But the continuation of Annexure- A FIR is unnecessary. Therefore this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings as against the petitioner in Crime No.1270/2018 of Thrikkakara Police Station based on Annexure-A FIR are quashed.