Criminal Revision Petition No. 1288 of 2012 · Kerala High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The criminal revision petition is disposed of as above
Provisions considered
Judgment
-2-CRRP.NO.1288/20127. SINOJ, S/O.JOSEPH, KUNNATHEKKAN VEETTIL, KALLIPPARA KARAYIL, VATHIKKUDY VILLAGE, IDUKKI -685 503.8. SUNIL, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, KAVUNKAL VEETTIL, KAVUNKALKARAYIL, KURISUMMOODU VILLAGE, CHANGANASSERY-686101.9. ANIL, S/O.RAGHAVAPANICKER, CHIRAYATH VEETTIL, THENGANA KARAYIL, ODAPPILLY VILLAGE,KOTTAYAM- 686 103.10. JOHNY, S/O.VARGHESE JOB, MANTHURUTHY AIKKULAM VEETTIL, NEDUMKUNNAM VILLAGE, CHANGANASSERRY- 686 101.11. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682 031. R1 TO R10 BY ADV. SRI.S.K.MURALEEDHARA KAIMAL R11 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:sts S.SIRI JAGAN, J.==================Crl.R.P.No. 1288 of 2012 ==================Dated this the 5th day of September, 2012 O R D E RThe petitioner is the defacto complainant in C.C.No.265/2004 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate'sCourt-I, Muvattupuzha. The Assistant Public Prosecutorappearing for the State in that calendar case filedC.M.P.No.916/2011 for permission to examine the investigatingofficer by issue of a commission under Section 284 Cr.P.C., sincethe investigating officer is unable to attend the court and tenderevidence due to his physical ailment. That petition was dismissedon the ground that the investigating officer is not a materialwitness and if such examination is ordered, that would delay thedisposal of the case further.2.I have heard the parties.3.I am of opinion that insofar as the Assistant PublicProsecutor wants to examine the investigating officer to provethe case of the State, it is only appropriate that permission isgranted for examining him as a witness. Insofar as theinvestigating officer is stated to be bed-ridden, it is onlyappropriate to invoke Section 284 Cr.P.C. for examining the Crl.r.p.1288/12 - : 2 :-investigating officer through an advocate commissioner. Accordingly, the order dated 27.3.2012 in C.M.P.No.916/2012 ofthe Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Muvattupuzha is setaside. The Magistrate is directed to permit examination of theinvestigating officer through an advocate commissionerappointed under Section 284 Cr.PC.The criminal revision petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The criminal revision petition is disposed of as above
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 284.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.