Habeeb Rahman v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/17TH CHAITHRA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 2123 of 2015 ------------------------ IN C.C NO. 31/2014 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD CRIME NO. 251/2013 OF VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, KASARGOD PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

------------------- HABEEB RAHMAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUNHI, R/AT SABNA COTTAGE, BANDICHAL, THEKKIL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

----------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER VIDYANAGER, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 2123 of 2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE I: COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.251/2013 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD DATED 27.6.2013.

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:

NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE ab

P.UBAID, J.

--------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.2123 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April, 2015 O R D E R The petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C No.31/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Kasaragod. He has been facing prosecution under Section 118 (d) of the Kerala Police Act, on the allegation that he told something offensive to the complainant over telephone. The petitioner now seek orders quashing the prosecution against him on the ground that the allegations in the FIR or in the final report will not in fact constitute such an offence. 2.

On a perusal of the FIR and the final report, I find that the allegations made by the police against the petitioner herein will not infact in any manner constitute the essentials and ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 118(d) of the Kerala Police Act. Continuance of this prosecution, I find, will be a sheer abuse of legal process. Even otherwise, the prosecution is liable to be quashed in view of the decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [2015(2) KLT 1 (SC)] where the Hon'ble Supreme Court declared that Section

Crl.M.C No.2123 of 2015 118(d) of the Kerala Police Act is unconstitutional. I find that the present prosecution against the petitioner is legally unsustainable.

In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioner in C.C No.31/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Kasaragod will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

P.UBAID JUDGE ab