O R D E R

This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the prayer herein is to quash Annexure-C complaint and Annexure-D order in S.C.No.300 of 2020 on the file of Sessions Court(Special Court for the Trial of Cases under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Thiruvananthapuram.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. On notice, the defacto complainant appeared and he opposed the petition.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor also given emphasis to the order taking cognizance. In this matter, in the order of cognizance, the learned Special Judge observed as under:

“5. The statements of the complainant and the witnesses do not reveal the ingredients of criminal conspiracy, wrongful confinement, criminal trespass and mischief.

6. The materials available made out offences punishable u/ss.3(1)(r)&(s) of the Act.

7. Respondent No.3 is a member of Scheduled Caste. So, the offence punishable under the Act will not stand against him.

8. Resultantly, the complaint as against respondent No.3 is dismissed u/s.203 Cr.P.C.

9. The complaint as against respondent Nos.1 and 2 is also dismissed in respect of the offences punishable u/ss.120 B, 294(b), 342, 447 & 427 r/w.34 of IPC.

10. Hence, cognizance is taken of the offences punishable u/ss.3(1)(r) & (s) of the Act against respondent Nos.1 and 2.”

4. Since it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that nothing stated in the order regarding the fate of the final report filed in the form of refer charge, a report from the learned Special Judge was called for. Accordingly, the learned Special Judge reported as under:

“The final report(Refer Report) in Crime No.1423/2016 of Sreekaryam Police Station was filed before this Court on 17.01.2017. On receipt of the same, notice was issued to the defacto complainant. In the meantime, on receipt of the notice from Police, on 17.01.2017 itself, the defacto complainant filed Crl.MP No.254/2017 before this Court seeking one month's time for filing protest complaint against the Final Report(Refer Report) filed by the Investigating Officer. Thereafter, on 14.08.2017, the defacto complainant filed the protest complaint before this Court and the same was numbered as Crl.MP 1677/2017. In the said proceedings, four witnesses were examined and after considering the evidence adduced, on 24.02.2020, cognizance was taken of the offences punishable u/ss 3(1)(r)

& (s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), against Accused Nos.1 and 2 and the case was registered as Sessions Case No.300/2020. The complaint as against Accused No.3 was dismissed u/s 203 Cr.PC. A copy of the order dated 24.02.2020 in Crl.M.P.1677/2017 is enclosed for kind perusal. I may further report that no order is seen passed in the Final Report (Refer Report) in Crime No.1423/2013 of Sreekaryam Police Station.

5. The learned counsel also placed a decision of this Court reported in [2009(1) KLT 794], Parameswaran Nair v. Surendran wherein, this Court settled the legal propositions, while considering a refer report and a protest complaint and the same are as under:

“17. The well settled legal propositions can be summed up as follows:

(1) When a final report is made by an officer of the Police Station under sub-s.(2) of S.173 of Code of Criminal Procedure, if the Magistrate is not inclined to take cognizance of the offence and issue process, notice must be issued to the complainant/first informant and opportunity is to be granted to him to make his submissions to persuade the Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence and issue process. (2) The Magistrate is not bound by the opinion of the investigating officer. He can disregard the report and take the view that there is sufficient ground for proceeding further and take cognizance of the offence and issue process. If the Magistrate decides to discard the report and take cognizance of the offence and issue process to the accused, it is