Disposed

Anil Kumar v. State of Keral Rep. by Public Prosecutor

Kerala HC14 Oct 2009Crl.MC/1958/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner accused under Sections 420 and 427 IPC filed a CrPC 1973 petition under Section 482 seeking quashing of final report and cognizance due to delay. Court denied quashing, permitted discharge from Magistrate. The judgment disposed of directly. Just a three-line disposition but with no substantive reasoning.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed permitting discretionary request of discharge.

Anil Kumar Vs State of Keral Rep. by Public… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1958 of 2009()

¶6

------------------------CC.1802/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOTTARAKKARA ....................

¶7

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED IN C.C.1802/2008

¶8

¶9

ANIL KUMAR, AGED 37, S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, ASWATHY BHAVAN, PANAYANCHERRY, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, ANCHAL P.O. KOLLAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANCHAL POLICE STATION.

¶15

PONNAMMA MOHANAN,SHALOM SADANATHIL, MUTHALATHU, ADLANCHERI MURI, YEROOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK.

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶19

CRL.M.C.NO. 1958 OF 2009

¶20

Dated 14^th October 2009

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Petitioner is the accused in C.C.1802/2008

¶23

on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kottarakkara taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 420 and 427 of Indian Penal Code under Annexure-III FIR. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-IV final report as well as the cognizance taken, contending that the incident was on 7/8/2000 and cognizance was taken only on 12/4/2006 and the ingredients of the offence is not made out.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the

¶25

petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶26

On hearing the learned counsel, I find no ground to quash the final report or the cognizance taken as sought for by the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner then submitted that petitioner may be permitted to seek an order of discharge from the learned Magistrate and raise all

¶27

CRMC 1958/09

¶28

¶29

the contentions raised herein.

¶30

Petition is disposed permitting the petitioner to seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure, raising all the contentions

¶31

raised herein.

¶32

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.

¶33

uj.

Anil Kumar v. State of Keral Rep. by Public Prosecutor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar v. State of Keral Rep. by Public Prosecutor

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

Yasar Arafath Vs Sherbina

Chonnam Muthukoya and Others Vs Lakshadweep State

Jose Thomas Vs State

Abdul Harif Vs State of Kerala

Mathai & Others Vs Vijayamma and Another

A.P.Rasheed and Others Vs State of Kerala and Another