Dismissed

Haiden Antony v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jan 2008Crl.MC/181/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court rejected the petitioner's application to quash an FIR alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust. The court held that the prima facie allegations in the FIR disclosed offences, and it was too early to quash the proceedings at the admission stage.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous Case was dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to approach the appropriate court at the appropriate stage.

Haiden Antony Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2008 / 1ST MAGHA 1929

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 181 of 2008()

¶6

¶7

CR NO. 533/2007 of MALA POLICE STATION

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

¶10

HAIDEN ANTONY (33 YEARS), S/O.ANTONY CHAKKAPPAN, KANICHAI HOUSE, MALA P.O., THRISSUR.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.N.KRISHNANKUTTY PILLAI

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE GOVT.PLEADER, ADVOCATE GENERAL'S OFFICE, HIGH COURT, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA POLICE STATION, MALA. THRISSUR.

¶16

JOHNSON (41 YEARS), S/O.VARGHESE, NELLISSERY HOUSE, VENNUR DESOM, MALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶17

THE MANAGER, H.D.F.C. BANK, THRISSUR.

¶18

BY ADV. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

V. RAMKUMAR , J.

¶21

========================== CRL.M.C. No. 181 of 2008 ========================== Dated this the 21^st day of January, 2008.

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioner, who is the accused in Crime No. 533/2007 of Mala Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 415, 417, 418 and 420 IPC, seeks to quash Annexure A1 FIR in the above crime and all further proceedings.

¶24

I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶25

It is too early to accept the petitioner's contention that the FIR on the face of it does not make out the offence alleged against the petitioner. The allegations in the FIR, prima facie, do show the commission of the aforementioned offences. But, it is one thing to allege the commission of the offences and another thing to conclude that the offence have been proved. Hence, this Court will be loath to quash the FIR and and stay the investigation of the offences. Accordingly, this Crl. M.C is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the appropriate court at the appropriate stage.

¶26

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

¶27

Haiden Antony v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haiden Antony 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

Manoj Vs State

T.S.Raveendran Vs v.C.Unnikrishnan

M/S.Sreeram Transport Finance Company Lt Vs M.a.Muhammed Shameem

Ritha Xavier Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Vs Sindhu

Seenath Shaji Vs the State of Kerala