Dismissed

Joseph Challissery & Ors. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 May 2008Crl.MC/1235/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by nine accused persons challenging prosecutions for using an altered National Flag. The court rejected the argument that the allegations did not attract culpability under Section 2 of the appropriate Act.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition was dismissed; the rights to claim discharge or acquittal before the Magistrate were preserved.

Joseph Challissery & Ors. Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2008) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2008 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1930

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1235 of 2008()

¶6

------------------------CC.1475/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KUNNAMKULAM CRIME NO.633 OF 2007 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS: ACCUSED

¶8

¶9

JOSEPH CHALLISSERY, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.UDUPPU, VAZHAPPILLY HOUSE POST KORATTIKARA, KADAVALLORE VILLAGE, THRISSUR.

¶10

N.K.ALI, AGED 52 YEARS,S/O.KUNJALI, NALAKATH HOUSE P.O, KARIKKAD, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR.

¶11

K.VISWAMBHARAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.KUNHUKUTTAKURUP, KURUTHOLAYIL HOUSE, P.O.THIPPILASSERY.

¶12

A.P.MUHAMMADALI, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.P.K.ABDUALLAHKUTTY,PALINRANJALAYIL HOUSE, P.O.PERUMPILLAVU,THRISSUR.

¶13

P.K.DEVADAS, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KORAN, PANNISSERY HOUSE, P.O.KOTTIKARA, THRISSUR.

¶14

K.V.SAJEESH, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN,KOZHIKILATH VEEDU KORATTIKARA,THRISSUR.

¶15

K.V.PRADEEPKUMAR, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.VASU, LAKSHMI NIVAS,P.O.KORATTIKARA,THRISSUR.

¶16

PRASANTH.M., AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, MULLAPPILLY HOUSE, P.O.KORATTIKARA,THRISSUR.

¶17

A.S.SURESH, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, AACHIYATH HOUSE, P.O.KORATTIKARA,THRISSUR.

¶18

BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT

¶19

SRI.RANJIT BABU

¶20

Crl.MC.No. 1235 of 2008() - 2 -

¶21

RESPONDENTS:

¶22

¶23

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.,KOCHI-31.

¶24

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

R.BASANT, J

¶27

Crl.M.C. No.1235 of 2008

¶28

Dated this the 22^nd day of May, 2008

¶29

ORDER

¶30

Petitioners are accused 1 to 9 and they face prosecutions under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971. The crux of the allegations against the petitioners is that they deliberately altered the National Flag of India and used it for a purpose which fell within the mischief of Section 2 of the said Act.

¶31

The crux of the allegations is that the Asoka Chakra in the middle of the Indian National Flag was altered to make it appear that it was a charka and it was consequently used for purposes in connection with a function organised by a political party.

¶32

The allegations clearly reveal that the National Flag was altered and was made use of for a purpose inconsistent with the use of the National Flag. I shall not express any final opinion on the question about the complicity of the petitioners, but I am certainly not persuaded to agree that the alleged facts do not

¶33

Crl.M.C. No.1235 of 2008

¶34

¶35

attract culpability under Section 2 of the said Act which reads as

¶36

follows:

¶37

“ 2. Insult to Indian National Flag and Constitution of India:- Whoever in any public place or in any other place within public view burns, mutilates, defaces, defiles, disfigures, destroys, tramples upon or [otherwise shows disrespect to or brings] into contempt (whether by words, either spoken or written, or by acts) the Indian National Flag or the Constitution of India or any part thereof, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”

¶38

I am, in these circumstances, not persuaded to direct premature termination of the prosecutions against the petitioners.

¶39

This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. Needless to say that the dismissal of this Crl.M.C will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioners to raise all appropriate contentions before the learned Magistrate at the appropriate stages to claim discharge/acquittal.

¶40

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶41

rtr/-

Joseph Challissery & Ors. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph Challissery & Ors. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.T.Joy Vs Bhuvanendra Kurup and Another

T.C.Kuriakose Vs Dilip Kumar

K.a.Ansari Vs State of Kerala

Nizar M.A. Vs S.I. of Police

R.Sivadasan Vs P.S.Sumam & Another

Raichal Mathew Vs State of Kerala