The absence of grounds in a Magistrate's order to proceed against accused constitutes an abuse of process and warrants quashing the proceedings.

ORDER

The accused Nos.1 and 2 in CC No.5010/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Changanassery, have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to quash the proceedings against them in the aforesaid case.

2. The learned Magistrate registered the aforesaid case by taking cognizance upon a protest complaint filed by the 2nd respondent herein. Earlier, the Thrikkodithanam Police had registered Crime No.2105/2016 in respect of the allegations levelled by the 2nd respondent in the aforesaid protest complaint. The sum and substance of the allegation was that the petitioners herein, who were the Sub Registrar of Thengana Sub Registry and the Village Officer of Madappilly Village Office, respectively, entered into a criminal conspiracy with the accused Nos.3 to 5 for the registration of two sale deeds by resorting to forgery. The reason stated by the 2nd respondent for raising such an allegation is that, in the two sale deeds registered at the Thengana Sub Registry at the instance of the 1st petitioner, the persons who had purchased the property had not affixed their finger print in the requisite registers. The Sub Inspector of Police, Thrikkodithanam, after conducting investigation on the above complaint, filed a Final Report on 12.01.2017 reporting that the complaint against the accused was false. It is thereafter that the 2nd respondent preferred a protest complaint before the learned Magistrate, which was taken on to files on 04.10.2019, and summons ordered against the accused to answer the charge under Sections 468 and 471 IPC read with Section 34 . Aggrieved by the aforesaid proceedings initiated by the learned Magistrate, the petitioners are here before this Court with this petition.

3. Notice was duly served on the 2nd respondent and he was represented by a counsel of his choice.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

5. The petitioners produced a certified copy of the impugned order of the learned Magistrate issuing summons to them and the other accused in CC No.5010/2019. The text of the aforesaid order is as follows:

“Complainant absent. No representation. Taken cognizance for the offence under Section 468 , 471 r/w 34 IPC . Case taken as CC 5010/2019. Summons to accused. For steps Call on. ”

6. It is apparent from the above order of the learned Magistrate that nothing has been stated therein as to the reason which prompted the learned Magistrate to issue summons to the petitioners and the other accused in the said case. There is not even a whisper in the said order that the learned Magistrate was satisfied on the enquiry conducted, that there were sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused. Nor could it be discerned from the aforesaid order that the learned Magistrate, after perusal of the findings in the Final Report filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, Thrikkodithanam, reporting the complaint as false, found that the findings in the above regard are not acceptable. A totally cryptic order has been passed, without stating the grounds for disagreeing with the findings in the protest complaint, and the reasoning adopted for coming to a conclusion that there were sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused in connection with the offences alleged against them.

7. Even if the infirmity of the aforesaid order due to the absence of necessary particulars is ignored, still it could be seen from the facts and circumstances of the case that the petitioners are unnecessarily arraigned in this complaint. As already stated above, the 1st petitioner was the Sub Registrar, Thengana and the 2nd petitioner was the Village Officer of Madappilly, at the time when the offences ar