Dismissed

Prince.J.Vellukunnel v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC14 Aug 2009Crl.MC/2139/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a petition seeking quashing of a complaint under Section 482 CrPC. The court held that since the alleged offence under Sections 420 and 34 IPC is compoundable under Section 320 CrPC, the Court should not quash the complaint but leave the parties to approach the Magistrate for permission to compound.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; parties directed to approach Magistrate for permission to compound the offence.

Prince.J.Vellukunnel Vs State of Kerala and Others — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 2139 of 2006

¶6

------------------------------CC.1490/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S): IST ACCUSED

¶8

-------------------------------------------

¶9

PRINCE.J.VELLUKUNNEL, VELLUKUNNEL HOUSE, FLAT NO.17-D, EXPRESS ESTATE, KALOOR.P.O, PIN-682 017.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND STATE

¶12

------------------------------------------------------------------

¶13

1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

2. GEORGE VARGHESE, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, FLAT NO.17-D, EXPRESS ESTATE, KALOOR.P.O, PIN-682 017.

¶15

3. SOJAN JOSEPH @ MATHACHAN, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 44 YEARS, HIGH RANGE FLORA, HIGH COURT JUNCTION, CRYSTAL COMPLEX, BANERJI, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI FOR R1. ADV. SRI.NAVEEN THOMAS FOR R.2 ADV. SRI.DILEEP S.KALLAR FOR R.3

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.

¶19

Crl.M.C.No.2139 of 2006

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.

¶22

1490/2002 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Ernakulam, taken cognizance by the Magistrate on Annexure-A4 complaint filed by the second respondent. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A4 complaint.

¶23

Crl.M.Appl.No.4461/2009 is jointly filed by the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3, stating that all the disputes between them were settled and second respondent has agreed to withdraw the complaint. Petitioner sought permission to compound the offence.

¶24

2.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second and third respondents and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶25

CRMC 2139/06

¶26

¶27

Offence alleged against the petitioner and third respondent is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Offence under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code is compoundable with leave of the court as provided under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure. When it is a

¶28

compoundable offence, it is not for this Court to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction to quash the complaint. Petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 are at liberty to approach the Magistrate for permission to compound the offence. If the second respondent seeks permission to compound the offence, Magistrate is to grant permission to compound the offence.

¶29

Petition is disposed accordingly.

¶30

14^th August, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv

Prince.J.Vellukunnel v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prince.J.Vellukunnel v. State of Kerala and Others

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

Bindu Vs State of Kerala

Mayyal Balan Vs State of Kerala and Others

M.S.Purushan Vs State of Kerala

Joy Vs Forest Range Officer Kollengode Forest

State of Kerala Vs Henry Vijayakumar

Prakash Vs State of Kerala