Court may quash proceedings when a competent authority finds the accused innocent and police misconduct is established.

O R D E R

The accused in C.C No.310/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against them in the said case. The allegation against them is that they committed offence under Sections

332, 353, 354(B), 354(A), 224 and 225(1) r/w Section 34 I.P.C.

2. The prosecution case is summarised as follows:

On 14.07.2016, at about 3:45 p.m, when the first accused parked his vehicle in a public road in such a manner as to cause traffic block, the de facto complainant (CW1), a Woman Civil Police Officer, asked him to remove that vehicle from that place. Enraged by the above direction, the first accused caught hold of the right hand of the de facto complainant and twisted, causing hurt, and also uttered sexually coloured innuendos. The first accused also caught hold of the uniform shirt of the de facto complainant and attempted to disrobe her, and obstructed the discharge of her official duty. Thereafter, when CW2 and CW3, the Sub Inspector of Police, Pandalam and another Civil Police Officer associated with that police station, took the first accused into custody, accused Nos.2 to 5 rescued the first accused from the custody of CW2 and CW3 by assaulting and applying force upon them. Thus, the accused committed the aforesaid offences.

3. 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 the first petitioner was subjected to severe physical atrocities at the instance of CW1 to CW3, and caused destruction to his shop room for the silly reason that the first petitioner removed his car as per the instructions of the de facto complainant only after letting the passengers to get down from that vehicle. According to the petitioners, the District Police Complaints Authority, Pathanamthitta, after conducting the necessary enquiry, found the de facto complainant, CW2 (the Sub Inspector of Police, Pandalam), CW13 (Additional Sub Inspector of Police, Pandalam) and another person by name Rajendran, who was the Writer of Pandalam Police Station, guilty of atrocities perpetrated upon the first petitioner, and recommended disciplinary action against them in connection with the incident involved in this case.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

5. Annexure-A3 is the copy of the order dated 07.02.2018 of the District Police Complaint Authority, Pathanamthitta in the complaint filed by the first petitioner against the de facto complainant, the Sub Inspector of Police and the Additional Sub Inspector of Police, Pandalam during the relevant period and the Writer of that police station against the police atrocities perpetrated upon him on 14.07.2016 in connection with the incident involved in this case. It could be seen from Annexure-A3 that the District Police Complaint Authority, Pathanamthitta conducted the enquiry with the examination of six witnesses as CW1 to CW6, and with the scrutiny of one document marked as Ext.A1, and also two CDs and 22 photographs pertaining to the police operation on 14.07.2016 in connection with the incident involved in this case, and found that all the four respondents in that complaint were guilty of dereliction of duty and commission of acts unbecoming of police officers. Annexure-A3 would also reveal that, though the respondents appeared in that enquiry, they submitted that they had no evidence to adduce. It is after taking into account all the relevant aspects as revealed in the aforesaid enquiry, that the District Police Complaint Authority, Pathanamthitta found the respondents in that complaint guilty