Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 59053
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Kauser Edappagath, J
P.M MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC/7465/2022
K.MOHAMMED RAFEEQ, AMARNATH R LAL, SANALDEV E.P.VISHNUMAYA ANANDAN
The court established that discharges for co-accused under similar charges necessitate similar treatment for all accused in the same case.
Headnote:
Defamation - Quashing of Proceedings - IPC Section 501, Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act Section 4 - The court quashed proceedings against the petitioner, aligning with prior discharges that established the inapplicability of the offences.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was accused of defamation alongside others for distributing a notice defaming a victim. Previous co-accused were discharged of similar offences.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations against the petitioner mirrored those of the discharged co-accused, determining that the offences under the respective sections were not applicable.
Issues: Whether the charges of defamation under IPC and the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act were applicable against the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that since co-accused were discharged under the same charges, similar relief should be granted to the petitioner.
Final Decision: Proceedings in C.C.No.651/2015 against the petitioner are quashed.
O R D E R
Dated this the 26th day of October, 2022 This Crl.M.C has been filed to quash all further proceedings in C.C.No.651/2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Ernakulam (for short 'court below').
2. The petitioner is the accused No.4. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 501 read with 34 of IPC and Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act .
3. The prosecution case in short is that all the accused including the petitioner, in furtherance of their common intention to defame the victim, distributed notice containing defamatory allegations among the students and defamed the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences.
4. Altogether there are five accused. Accused Nos. 1 to
3 and 5 filed discharge application before the court below. The court below as per Annexure II order discharged them of the offence under Section 501 of the IPC . Thereafter, they approached this Court in revision and this Court as per Annexure IV order discharged them of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act as well. The allegations against the petitioner is same as that of the allegations against accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 who were already discharged. The offences under of as well as under Section 4 of the are not attracted as against the petitioner also. Hence, no purpose will be served in proceeding further against the petitioner. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Further proceedings in C.C.No.651/2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Ernakulam as against the petitioner hereby stands quashed.
