Back
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR
Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORDER)
The accused in C.C No. 231 of 2020 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial First Class Magisatrate Court, Thriuvananthapuram, filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The above case is based on a private complaint filed by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant in the form of a protest complaint against Annexure A1 refer report filed by police in Crime No. 1162 of 2014 of the Medical College Police Station.
2. The main greivience raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned Magistrate has passed a cryptic order taking cognizance of the offences without even referring to Annexure A1 refer report. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed for setting aside Annexure A4 order of the learned Magistrate dated 27.02.2020, taking cognizance of the offence under Section 506(i) IPC against the petitoner.
Though service was complete, 2nd respondent/defacto complainant did not turn up.
3. From Annexure A4 proceedings of the learned Magistrate, it is revealed that the learned Magistrate has recorded the statements of the complainant and a witness and also directed the SHO, Medical College Pol
Criminal intimidation – Order taking cognizance of offence should be a speaking order, containing materials justifying order taking cognizance.
A Magistrate's order taking cognizance must be a speaking order detailing materials relied upon; failure to do so necessitates quashing of the order.
Cognizance of offences by Magistrate requires a speaking order, reflecting consideration of all relevant materials.
The court emphasized the necessity for Magistrates to follow prescribed legal procedures in taking cognizance on complaints against police reports.
A Magistrate's order taking cognizance must be a reasoned one, reflecting an application of mind to the facts and law, and must not be cryptic or irrational.
A magistrate must consider police refer reports before taking cognizance of protest complaints to ensure justice and adherence to procedural fairness.
The Magistrate must consider all relevant findings and explicitly state reasons for proceedings against an accused when evaluating a protest complaint.
A Magistrate must apply judicial discretion and provide reasoning when referring a matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.; mechanical orders are unsustainable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
