The presence of sufficient evidence in an FIR necessitates trial, regardless of civil proceedings related to the case.

O R D E R

The accused in C.C No.2065/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thrissur, has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against them in the said case. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 323, 294(b), 506(i) and 354 I.P.C r/w Section 34 I.P.C.

2. The case against the petitioners is summarised as follows:

The first petitioner and the de facto complainant/second respondent are Directors of an establishment by name ‘Trinity Pharmaceuticals’ functioning in the building belonging to the father of the second respondent. The other petitioners are also staff associated with the above institution. There arose a dispute between the second respondent and the petitioners in connection with the removal of the father of the second respondent from the post of Managing Director of the above establishment. Due to the above reason, the petitioners were asked to vacate the building belonging to the father of the second respondent in which the above institution was functioning. Since they did not abide by the above demand, the second respondent had locked the door of the aforesaid building. On 19.06.2017, at about 10:30 a.m, the petitioners tried to dismantle the above lock and to make forceful entry into the building, which the second respondent objected to. At that time, the petitioners physically assaulted and verbally abused the second respondent with obscene words. They also outraged her modesty by pulling over the shawl worn by her, and also by pushing her down by getting hold of her body. Thus, the petitioners are alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The case has been registered by the Thrissur West Police on the basis of the First Information Statement given by the de facto complainant on 27.06.2017. After the completion of the investigation, the Sub Inspector of Police, Thrissur Town West Police Station, laid the final report alleging the aforesaid offences against the petitioners.

4. In the present petition, the petitioners would contend that they are totally innocent, and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further contended that there exists a civil case against the second respondent, her father and other relatives, in connection with the occupation of the building where Trinity Pharmaceuticals is functioning. In the above civil suit, a prohibitory injunction is said to have been issued against the second respondent and others from obstructing the petitioners from entering into the said building and peacefully working there.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the second respondent, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

6. The contention of the petitioners that there existed a civil suit in connection with the occupation of the building where the Trinity Pharmaceuticals is functioning, is not having any relevance in deciding the prayer in this petition to quash the proceedings in the criminal case pending against the petitioners. This is because of the reason that the incident leading to the registration of the crime against the petitioners took place more than a month before the date of institution of a civil suit by the petitioners against the de facto complainant and others. Therefore, the pendency of the aforesaid civil suit or the interim injunction order passed in that case would, in no way, obliterate the offences alleged against the petitioners.

6. Going by the First Information Statement given by the second respondent to the Thrissur West Police, it could be seen that the necessary particulars of the offences alleged against the petitioners are clearly brought out. So also, the final report and the accompanyi