The petitioner challenged a report regarding the cutting of an Anjili tree, claiming it was on his property. The court held that the tree's location required evidence and was too premature to quash proceedings, dismissing the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2009 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1931
Crl.MC.No. 1011 of 2009(F)
------------------------------------(OR.1/09 OF KODANADU RANGE, MEKKAPPALA FOREST STATION)
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
----------------------------------
PETER, AGED 50, S/O.POULOSE, PALIYATH MOLEL HOUSE, VADAKKUMBHAGOM P.O., KOTTAPPADI.
BY ADV. MR.C.P.UDAYABHANU.
RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT:
---------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY RANGER, KODANADU RANGE (O.R.1/2009), MEKKAPPALA FOREST STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
prv.
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 1011 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 1st day of April, 2009.
This petition is filed with a prayer to quash Annexure-I report and all further proceedings pursuant to that. The case is in relation to the cutting of Anjili tree. According to the prosecution the said tree stood in a Government property whereas according to the petitioner it stood between his property. A prosecution will lie if the tree cut stood in the Government property. It is too early a stage now to come to the conclusion where the tree exactly stands. It is a matter of evidence. So it is too premature a stage to quash the proceedings. Therefore this Crl.M.C is dismissed.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ul/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether proceedings should be quashed at this stage given the disputed location of the cut tree between government and private property.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Peter
State of Kerala
M.N. Krishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
