Point of law: Criminal law can be set in motion by any person. Here, on the ground that after sustaining grievous hurt, her husband is unable to move out and hence, she has taken initiative to prefer the complaint. The principle of locus-standi is alien to criminal jurisprudence.

JUDGMENT :

K. HARIPAL, J.

1. Aggrieved by an order of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Aluva in returning the complaint instituted under Section 190 of the Cr.P.C. the petitioner has moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

“(a) Declare that the petitioner being wife of the aggrieved person or injured person or victim of a crime is competent to lodge complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate under Section 190(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(b) Declare that the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court exercising jurisdiction under Sections 190, 200, 202, 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall not delegate his power to his ministerial staff as has been done in Ext.P4 complaint.

(c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Aluva-II to accept Ext.P4 complaint and proceed with it in accordance with law at the earliest with a definite time frame.”

2. Petitioner is the wife of the injured in a road traffic accident. It is alleged that on 16.10.2021, petitioner's husband Thankachan, a carpenter by avocation, sustained injuries while proceeding to the place of work travelling on the pillion seat of the motor cycle bearing Registration No. KL-32/Q-0114 ridden by the accused, through Elamakkara- Puthukkalavattom Road in front of Skyline Apartments, due to the rash and negligent riding as to endanger human life, since he had abruptly twisted, the vehicle capsized and her husband fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was immediately rushed to the MAJ Hospital, Edappally. Ext.P1 indicates that Thankachan was taken there at 9.20 am on 16.10.2021 with the alleged history of road traffic accident. Ext.P2 discharge summary indicates that on the same day, he was taken to the Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Lisie hospital where he was admitted with the history of pain and swelling on left ankle following alleged history of road traffic accident. Diagnosis was fracture trimalleolar left ankle for which he underwent surgery on 19.10.2021 and was discharged on 21.10.2021. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite Ext.P1 intimation given by the CMO, MAJ Hospital to the Sub-Inspector, Elamakkara Police Station, crime was not registered. It is alleged that on 11.11.2021, petitioner lodged a complaint before the City Police Commissioner, Ernakulam which also was not acted upon and thus, on 19.1.2022, she approached the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Aluva. It is specifically averred that after sustaining grievous injuries, her husband is in immobile stage and is under complete rest and thus, she approached the court alleging offences under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC. But astonishingly enough, the complaint was returned stating that the petition was filed by the wife of the complainant. The most disturbing aspect is that a note seen put on the last page of the complaint, as follows:

“19.01.2022

Verified within the jurisdiction. Receipt of complaint at Commissioner Office is not seen produced. Hence for orders.

Id/-

Petition filed by wife of the complainant. Hence may be returned, for orders.

Id/-

Returned

Sd/-

It is clear that the signed order was passed by the Magistrate. It is pointed out that the Magistrate has returned the complaint on the premise that it was filed by the wife of the complainant which is illegal.”

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

4. I have no doubt that the order passed by the Magistrate is illegal and unsustainable. It is the settled proposition of law that criminal law can be set in motion by any person. Here, on the ground that after sustaining grievous hurt, her husband is unable to move out and hence, she has taken initiative to prefer the complaint. The principle of locus-standi is alien to criminal jurisprudence. In this connection, it is appropriate to extract th