CRL.MC No. 1534 of 2008 · Kerala High Court

BY ADV. SRI.K.SUNILKUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.

THE SUPERINTENDENT GOVT. MENTAL HEALTH CENTRE, THRISSUR. BY PUBLIC PORSCUTOR MR. K.S. SIAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 7-4-2008 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No. 1534 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of April, 2008 ORDER In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks to quash Annexure-A4 order dated 25-1-2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Court, North Paravur in Crl.M.P.No.20/2007 in S.C.No.188/2000. The said order reads as follows: “ Compliance reported as per the Medical Certificate is not complete and hence dismissed.”

2. The petitioner was the sole accused in S.C.No.188/2000 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, North Paravur, which was a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. As per Annexure A-1 judgment dated 26-2-2002, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the petitioner giving him the benefit of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows: CRL.M.C.NO. 1534/2008 -2-

In the result, the accused is entitled to an acquittal. Therefore I acquit the accused u/s.235 (1) of Cr.P.C.of the offence punishable u/s.302 and 307 I.P.C. Accused shall sent to mental hospital. He will be set free if the doctor of mental hospital certify that he is capable of taking care of himself and he would not harm himself of others in case he is set at liberty and in compliance with the mental health Act of 1987. M.O.1 chopper would be sold in auction and sale proceeds would be credited to the Govt. All other material objects which are valuables would be destroyed after the expiry of period of appeal.

The aforesaid portion extracted from Annexure-A1 judgment is strictly not in compliance with Section 335 Cr.P.C. The petitioner/accused should have been directed to be detained in safe custody in the mental health centre concerned subject to a relative or a friend making an application before the court and volunteering to give security as provided in Section 335(3)Cr.P.C. The Sessions Judge was also bound to report to the Government CRL.M.C.NO. 1534/2008 -3- the action taken by him under sub-section (1) of Section 335 Cr.P.C. That has not been done. The Additional Sessions Judge is directed to pass appropriate orders in terms of Section 335 Cr.P.C. and in case a friend or near relative of the accused applies for custody of the accused and is willing to offer security as provided under Section 335(3)Cr.P.C., the custody of the accused shall be handed over to such friend or relative. This Crl.M.C.is disposed of accordingly. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE ks.