C.T. Ravi Kumar, J.

1. The petitioner is a Police Officer. He is the accused in CC No. 1432 of 2010 on the files of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Cherthala and he is indicted therein for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 341 of the Indian Penal Code. The first respondent filed Annexure-A1 private complaint which was taken on file and registered as CC No. 1432 of 2010 against the petitioner alleging commission of the aforesaid offences. The gist of the allegations of the first respondent in the complaint is as hereunder:

"On 10/10/2009 he was riding his motor cycle bearing No. KL.32-A-8075 through Cherthala - Alappuzha road from north to south. He stopped the vehicle at X-ray junction to turn right from there to enter into Cherthala - Ernakulam Highway and upon getting green signal at about 12.15 p.m. he proceeded to enter Cherthala - Ernakulam road and then a white coloured Lancer car came ignoring the signal and it almost hit on his vehicle. He challenged the said action and upon seeing the petitioner in the nearby parked police jeep he made an oral complaint against the driver of the said white coloured Lancer car. However, the petitioner let off the driver of Lancer car without even giving a warning and thereupon, he questioned the impropriety in the said action and the petitioner got annoyed and abused him with obscene language. The petitioner caught hold of him on the collar of his shirt and restrained his movement and then apprehending a complaint from him the petitioner registered a case against him alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 119 read with Section 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was with such allegations that Annexure-A1 complaint was preferred."

2. Cognizance of the aforesaid offences was taken thereon and the complaint was taken into file and numbered as CC No. 1432 of 2010 by the learned Magistrate. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner has come up with the captioned Crl MC raising grievance against the continuation of the proceedings based on Annexure-A1 complaint on the ground that it is bad for want of sanction under Section 197(1) CrPC and permission under Section 113 of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 and seeking for quashment of Annexure-A1 complaint and all further proceedings in the said calendar case. It is contended that on 10/10/2009 the petitioner registered a crime against the first respondent alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 119 read with Section 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act and that was taken into file as ST No. 1804 of 2009 by the Court. Annexure-A2 is the charge sheet in that case. Subsequently, the first respondent was issued with summons and he was required to appear before the Court on 19/10/2009. It is thereafter that the first respondent filed Annexure-A1 complaint against the petitioner as a counter blast.

3. Now, the petitioner challenges continuation of the proceedings in CC No. 1432 of 2010 mainly contending that the complaint could not be proceeded with for want of sanction under Section 197(1), CrPC as also permission under Section 113 of the Kerala Police Act. In fact, cognizance could not have been taken by the learned Magistrate in the absence of proper sanction, it is submitted. The petitioner also contended that a conjoint reading of Annexures-A1 and A2 would reveal that the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence as part of his official duties at the relevant point of time and that he registered a crime against the first respondent accusing him of commission of offences punishable under Section 119 read with Section 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Though he was acquitted in ST No. 1804 of 2009 arising therefrom it is contended that Annexure-A2 would reveal that in ST No. 1804 of 2009 the first respondent was required to appear before the Court on 19/10/2009 and Annexure-A1 complaint was filed by him only subsequently viz., on 25/11/2009. In short, according to him, ins