Crl.R.C.No. 8 of 2016 ..1.. 2025:KER:25987 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 CRL.RC NO. 8 OF 2016 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.10.2012 IN CP 121 OF 2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, NEYYATTINKARA THE COURT ITS OWN MOTION SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS ON A COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM DISTRICT JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REGARDING WRONG COMMITTAL IN C.P.NO.121 OF 2012 OF JFCM-I, NEYYATTINKARA AGAINST RESPONDENTS 1 AJI, S/O.BHADRAN, PANAYIL VEEDU, VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, KYMANOM, MANUKULADICHAMANGALAM, NEMOM VILLAGE 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM SRI.M.P. PRASANTH, PP THIS CRIMINAL REVISION CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.R.C.No. 8 of 2016 ..2.. 2025:KER:25987 O R D E R This suo motu criminal revision case was registered based on a communication from the District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram forwarding a report from the Additional District and Sessions Judge-VII, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. C.P.No.115 of 2000 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – I, Neyyattinkara was charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 427, 326 and 307 read with 149 of IPC. The learned Magistrate as per the order dated 18.06.2001 committed the case against all the accused except accused No.8 to the Court of Sessions, Thiruvananthapuram under Section 209(a) of Cr.P.C. Since accused No.8 was absconding, the case as against him was split up and refiled as C.P.No.42 of 2001. Thereafter, the accused No.8 appeared before the learned Magistrate and his case was refiled as C.P.No.121 of 2012. However, the offences against him were shown as under Sections 12(1), 55(g) and 65(a) of Crl.R.C.No. 8 of 2016 ..3.. 2025:KER:25987 the Abkari Act. As per the order dated 22.10.2012 in C.P.No.121 of 2012, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. In the committal order it was observed that the accused had possessed the materials for manufacturing liquor, in violation of the provisions of the Abkari Act and since the offence was triable exclusively by the Sessions Court, the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court took the case on file and transferred it to Additional District and Sessions Court-VII, Thiruvananthapuram and numbered as S.C.No.1372 of 2012. Later on, the Additional Sessions Judge reported that even though the case against accused No.8 arose out of C.P.No.115 of 2000 for the offences under various sections of IPC, when the same was refiled as C.P.No.121 of 2012 the offences were shown under the Abkari Act and it is a mistake. 3. I have heard Sri.M.P.Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor. Crl.R.C.No. 8 of 2016 ..4.. 2025:KER:25987 4. Apparently, the committal order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara dated 22.10.2012, in C.P.No.121 of 2012 is wrong inasmuch as the offences against the accused therein were shown as under Sections 12(1), 55(g) and 65(a) of the Abkari Act. In fact, the offences charged against the accused No.8 were under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 427, 326 and 307 of IPC read with 149 of IPC. Hence, the committal order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara in C.P.No.121 of 2012 dated 22.10.2012 is hereby set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh committal order in accordance with law. The Registry is directed to re-transmit the trial court records to the trial court. The criminal revision case is disposed of as above. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE APA