JUDGMENT

This Writ Petition has been filed by the de facto complainant in C.C No. 23/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vatakara aggrieved by the investigation being conducted by the Investigating Officer.

2. A crime was registered as Crime No. 255/2018 of Chombala police station against three persons for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326, 308 read with 34 of the IPC. One Mr. Arjun was arrayed as the 1st accused, one Mr. Shafeer was arrayed as the 2nd accused and one Mr. Vijayan was arrayed as the 3rd accused in the FIR. Ext.P1 is the FIR. After conducting investigation, the police filed a final report against the accused, namely Arjun alone for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, and 324 of the IPC. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Investigating Officer, without conducting a proper inquiry, and to help the accused, without any reason deleted accused Nos. 2 and 3 from the array of the accused and also deleted the offences under Sections 326 and 308 of the IPC. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached the Court.

3. I have heard Sri. Rakesh Roshan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Sangeetha Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. I went through the FIS, the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. which forms part of the final report as well as the entire records. Immediately after the incident, the petitioner was admitted as an inpatient in the Government Hospital at Vatakara and discharged on 29.11.2018. I have called for the entire treatment record of the de facto complainant from the Government Hospital, Vatakara.

5. The prosecution case in short is that on 24.11.2018 at about 9 p.m., while the petitioner's son Balakrishnan was coming to his house, three accused persons, mentioned above assaulted him using an iron rod.

6. The treatment records summoned from the Government Hospital would show that in the incident, the petitioner has sustained fracture. In the FIS, the petitioner stated that she was attacked by the 1st accused, namely Arjun, using an iron rod, and the 2nd accused, namely Shafeer, beat and kicked her son Balakrishnan. She further stated that, while the altercation was going on, the 3rd accused, Vijayan rushed to the spot and caught hold of the neck of Balakrishnan. However, in the statement given by Balakrishnan to the police under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., he has specifically stated that the 2nd accused, Shafeer did not beat him, on the other hand, he tried to deter the 1st accused from attacking him. He did not say any overt act done by the 3rd accused, Vijayan. He did not even say the presence of Vijayan at the place of occurrence. It is pertinent to note that even according to the petitioner, the assault made by the 2nd and 3rd accused, namely Shafeer and Vijayan, was not on her but on her son Balakrishnan. But Balakrishnan has no such case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Balakrishnan did not give such a statement to the police. Such submission cannot be accepted in the absence of any other evidence.

7. In the accident cum wound certificate, in the history column, it is stated that one Mr. Arjun and two others beat the petitioner with their hands. Thus, the petitioner did not state to the doctor that any weapon was used. Even Sri. Balakrishnan stated in his statement that Mr. Arjun beat the petitioner with a stick. He has no case that any iron rod is used. There are no materials collected in the investigation to suggest that any dangerous weapon was used by the 1st accused, Mr. Arjun to assault the petitioner. In these circumstances, I am of the view that there is nothing wrong in deleting the accused Nos. 2 and 3 from the array of parties and also deleting Section 326 as well as Section 308 of the IPC.

Writ petition fails and, accordingly, it is dismissed.