Poonthura Sreekumar and Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. WEDNESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022/2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 6796 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 SREEKUMAR @ POONTHURA SREEKUMAR AGED 60 YEARS S/O NARAYANAN, PUTHUVAL PUTHENVEEDU MANIKYAVILAKAM, POONTHURA P.O THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026 2 SURESH KUMAR AGED 61 YEARS S/O RAVEENDRAN, TC 46/564, KOPPRAPURA VEEDU MANIKYAVILAKAM, POONTHURA P.O THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026 BY ADVS. P.K.VARGHESE M.T.SAMEER P.S.ANISHAD K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN DHANESH V.MADHAVAN JERRY MATHEW REGHU SREEDHARAN APARNA ANIL RAMEEZ M. AZEEZ NAMITHA K.S. BIJU KUMAR ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN - 682031 2 SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE CIVIL STATION ROAD, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695005 3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER 2 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 POONTHURA POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026 4 JAYARAMAN.K AGED 62 YEARS S/O. KESAVAN, TC 47/470(1), KARTHIKA BHAVAN, AALUKADU, POONTHURA P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695026 (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT IMPLEADED) 5 VIJAYAN.S AGED 58 YEARS S/O. SANKARAN, 'CHITHRA BHAVAN', TC 69/2200, POONTHURA P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695026. (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT IMPLEADED) BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR D.KISHORE MEERA GOPINATH R.MURALEEKRISHNAN (MALAKKARA) ADV M P PRASHANTH- PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.11.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.7565/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 3 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. WEDNESDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA,** ## **1944** **CRL.MC NO. 7565 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 POONTHURA SREEKUMAR AGED 60 YEARS S/O NARAYANAN, PUTHUVAL PUTHENVEEDU MANIKYAVILAKAM, POONTHURA P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026 2 SURESH KUMAR AGED 61 YEARS S/O RAVEENDRAN, TC 46/564, KOPPRAPURA VEEDU MANIKYAVILAKAM, POONTHURA P.O THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026 BY ADVS. P.K.VARGHESE M.T.SAMEER P.S.ANISHAD K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN DHANESH V.MADHAVAN JERRY MATHEW BIJU KUMAR REGHU SREEDHARAN RAMEEZ M. AZEEZ NAMITHA K.S. ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 4 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 - 2 SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE CIVIL STATION ROAD, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695005 - 3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER POONTHURA POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026 - 4 JAYARAMAN. K AGED 62 YEARS S/O. KESAVAN, TC 47/470(1), KARTHIKA BHAVAN, AALUKADU, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695026 (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT IMPLEADED) - 5 VIJAYAN.S AGED 58 YEARS S/O. SANKARAN, 'CHITHRA BHAVAN', TC 69/2200, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695026 (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT IMPLEADED) BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR KISHORE MEERA GOPINATH R.MURALEEKRISHNAN (MALAKKARA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.11.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.6796/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 5 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 ## **COMMON ORDER** The petitioners are the A parties referred to in Annexure-1 proceedings pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Poonthura, which was initiated under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. The Crl. M.C No. 6796/2022 was filed by the petitioners challenging the Annexures-2 and 3 summonses issued to the petitioners showing as summons to the accused persons. The subject matter of the dispute pertains to the administration of Sree Dharma Sastha Temple, Poonthura, Thiruvananthapuram. The proceedings were initiated on the basis of a report dated 12.07.2022 submitted by the Station House officer, Poonthura, to the effect that the disputes between two groups with regard to the management of the said temple are causing law and order problems in the locality. 2. When the Crl.M.C No.6796/2022 came up for admission before this Court on 30.09.2022, it was contended on behalf of the petitioners that the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate insisted on the physical presence of the petitioners and the parties are not 6 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 being permitted to be represented through a lawyer. Therefore an order was passed on 30.09.2022, permitting the petitioners to enter appearance before the 2[nd] respondent in response to Annexures-3 and 4 through their pleader. It is reported that the petitioners are appearing before the 2[nd] respondent through their pleader. 3. During the pendency of Crl.M.C No 6796/2022 , the Sub Divisional Magistrate passed an order on 22.10.2022 in Case No 8571/2022, in which it was directed that the election scheduled to be conducted on 25.10.2022 shall be deferred for a period of two weeks. Challenging the said order, Crl.M.C 7565/2022 was filed by the petitioners, and when the said Crl.M.C came up for admission on 27.10.2022, an order was passed by this Court to stay further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-6 order for a period of two weeks. 4. Today, when both these Crl.MCs came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that, on 27.11.2022, a further order had been passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate to stop further proceedings under Section 7 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 145 of Cr.P.C, on the reason that the disputes in relation to the management of the Sree Dharma Sastha Temple, Poonthura between the Management Committee and the Temple Protection Committee and litigations in connection with the same, are pending before the High Court as well as the Civil Court. In the meantime, the B party in the proceedings got themselves impleaded in both the Crl.M.Cs 5. Heard Sri.P.K Varghese, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both these Crl.M.Cs and Sri. D Kishore, the learned counsel appearing for the additional respondents 4 and 5 in these Crl.M.Cs. 6. When the order dated 27.11.2022 was placed before me, the learned counsel for the additional respondents pointed out that the pendency of the cases before the High Court or civil court would not preclude the Sub Divisional Magistrate from exercising the jurisdiction vested upon him under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. To substantiate the same, the learned counsel relies on the decision rendered by this Court in **St. George Syrian Church, Mannathur and Another v. Revenue Divisional Officer** [2013 8 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 (1) KHC 36]. It is also pointed out that the basic dispute pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerns the possession of the temple in question, and it is pointed out that the same is now locked. It was further pointed out that the proceedings initiated by the Sub Division Magistrate have to be continued until the civil court passes appropriate orders. The learned counsel for the additional respondents further pointed out that the proceedings which are the subject matter of these Crl.M.C’s were initiated based on a police report submitted before the Sub Divisional Magistrate to the effect that the dispute between the parties is causing a law and order situation. 7. After considering all the relevant aspects, I am of the view that it requires to be clarified in these cases that if the dispute pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate relates to the possession of the properties of the temple and it causes any threat to law and order situation in the locality, the Sub Divisional Magistrate will have the jurisdiction to entertain the same, and pass appropriate orders to control the situation until a competent Court passes appropriate orders with respect to the possession of 9 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 the property. Even if civil cases are pending between the parties in connection with the same, as held by this Court in **St. George Syrian Church** 's case (supra), so long as no interim orders are passed by the competent Civil Court affecting the right of the parties, the Sub Divisional Magistrate shall have the jurisdiction to continue the proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. In this case, as of now, no orders are passed by the Civil Court touching upon the rights of the parties. This Court passed an interim order in Crl.M.C No. 7565/2022 on 27.10.2022 only in respect of the conduct of the election and that was not intended to interdict the proceedings before the Sub Divisional Magistrate under Section 145 of Cr.P.C, in its entirety. Similarly, the interim order passed by this court on 30.09.2022 was to ensure that the petitioners get the opportunity to participate in the proceedings through their pleader, and that order was also not for curtailing the proceedings as such. 8. Now, considering the fact that the election is already conducted, the situation which prompted this Court to pass an order on 27.10.2022 is no longer in existence. In such 10 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 circumstances, I deem it appropriate to dispose of these Crl.M.Cs, directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate to continue the proceedings already initiated, if the dispute relates to the possession of the temple and it affects the law and order situation in the locality. The Sub Divisional Magistrate has all the powers under section 145 of Cr.P.C and shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders invoking the said provision. However, it is clarified that the orders passed and the measures taken by the Sub Divisional Magistrate shall be subject to the orders passed by the civil Court in the dispute. The parties shall be entitled to appear in the proceedings through their pleader/pleaders, if they wish to engage. Sd/- **ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE** rpk 11 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7565/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES |Annexure1|A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED| |---|---| ||12.07.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD| ||RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT| |Annexure2|A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED| ||20.09.2022 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO| ||THE 2ND PETITIONER| |Annexure3|A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE| ||2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER| ||DATED 28.09.2022| |Annexure4|A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE| ||2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER| ||DATED 28.09.2022| |Annexure5|A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION| ||SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE| ||REVENUE SECRETARY OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT| ||DATED 28.09.2022| |Annexure6|A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 22/10/2022| ||ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT| |Annexure7|A TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF PERSONS WHO| ||WERE ELECTED UNANIMOUSLY PUBLISHED BY THE| ||RETURNING OFFICER| 12 Crl.M.C Nos.6796 and 7565 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6796/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 12.07.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED 20.09.2022 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER Annexure-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 28.09.2022 Annexure-4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 28.09.2022 Annexure-5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER TO THE REVENUE SECRETARY OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT DATED 28.09.2022 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES Annexure R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 11.10.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER HEREIN AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE POONTHURA DHEEVARA SABHA KARAYOGA KSHETHRA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHI Annexure R4(b) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 6.10.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN M.C. 8571/2021 ALONG WITH TYPED COPY