O R D E R

The sole accused in C.C.No.1630 of 2014 on the file of the JFCM Court-I, Palakkad seeks to quash Annxure-A4 FIR laid against him for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(1) of IPC and S.118(d) of the Kerala Police Act.

2. The prosecution allegation is that on

1.6.2014 and 3.6.2014, petitioner called the second respondent, who is the de facto complainant over mobile phone from Gulf and used abusive words and further criminally intimidated also.

3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that the allegations in Annexure-A4 final report do not disclose any of the offences punishable u/ss.

294(b), 506(1) and S.118(d) of the KP Act.

5. It goes without saying that S.118(d) of the KP Act cannot survive any longer after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Shreya Singhal vs. Union ofd India (2015 (2) KLT 1 (SC) which held that the said provision in the Police Act is unconstitutional. Perusal of Annexure-A3 FI statement given by the second respondent does not disclose the actual words that were used for abusing the de facto complainant. In the absence of the exact words being revea