~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.1958/2012 of the Hill Palace Police Station, presently pending as C.P.No.25/2013 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam. Initially, Crime No.1958/2012 of Hill Palace Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 294(b) read with Section 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(XI) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It seems that the concerned Dy.S.P., who had conducted the investigation, had referred the matter as false through a refer report filed before the court below. As the matter has been referred as false, the de facto complainant has preferred a private complaint in protest to the refer report. It seems that the court below has taken cognizance of the Crl.M.C.5539/2014 : 2 : private complaint, taken it into file and issued process and numbered it as C.P.25/2013. The petitioners have come up under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for getting Annexure-I complaint and the proceedings in C.P.25/2013 quashed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor.
3. The main point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the learned Magistrate ought to have passed an order on Annexure-III refer report either by accepting the refer report or by rejecting the same and that unless and until the refer report was accepted, the de facto complainant could not have preferred a private complaint in protest to the refer report. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is not clear as to whether the refer report was accepted or not. Even though it has also been contended that the offences alleged against the petitioners will not lie, on going through the allegations contained in the private complaint, I am of the view that the allegations, Crl.M.C.5539/2014 : 3 :
prima facie, constitute the offences alleged. At the same time, the petitioners shall have the opportunity to take up all such contentions while hearing under Section 227 Cr.P.C. as the procedure contemplated is one in the trial of sessions cases. Even if the petitioners have got a valid contention that the refer report was not accepted by the learned Magistrate, they shall be permitted by the Special Court to take up that contention also while hearing the matter under Section 227 Cr.P.C.
By reserving the said rights of the petitioners, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of.
Sd/-
(B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/25/11 // True Copy // PA to Judge