The High Court of Kerala allowed the criminal petition seeking quashing of the case, C.C.1909/2004, against the petitioner, the fourth accused, under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC, relying on a prior order quashing cases against similar accused.
Cognizance taken in C.C.1909/2004 against the petitioner, the fourth accused, is quashed.
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.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
FRIDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2010 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1932
Crl.MC.No. 1070 of 2010()
----------------------------------CC.1909/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI, IN CRIME NO. 66/04 CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.
PETITIONER(S): 4TH ACCUSED
--------------------------------------------
JOHN KURIAN PERIAPURATH,PERIAPURATH HOUSE,MUTHOLAPURAM.P.O,ELANJI-686665,
BY ADV. SRI.VINUCHAND
RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT /STATE
-----------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULM.
2. SANTHOSH THOMAS,S/O.O.J.THOMAS, OLASSA DALE,VYTTILA,ERNAKULAM.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V.PRAMOD
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
CRL.M.C.NO.1070 OF 2010
--------------------------------------------- Dated 29th October, 2010
O R D E R
Petitioner is the fourth accused in
C.C.1909/2004 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kochi, taken
cognizance for the offence under Section 420
read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on
Annexure-A1 final report submitted by Circle Inspector of Police, Ernakulam Central Police Station. Second respondent is the de facto
complainant.
second respondent, he did not appear. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
Crl.M.C.601/2008 dated 30/11/2009, after hearing the second respondent herein also, cognizance
Crmc 1070/10
2
taken against accused 3,5,7 and 8 was quashed finding that the final report does not show that they are either the Directors of the company or as Directors they were responsible for the business and the management of the affairs of the company and allegations is only that first accused gave advertisement and second accused was the legal advisor and they received the amount which was misappropriated. Case against the petitioner is also identical to the case against accused 3,5,7 and 8. In such circumstances, case against the petitioner also can only be quashed.
Petition is allowed. Cognizance taken in C.C.1909/2004 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kochi against the petitioner, the fourth accused is quashed.
The
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.
uj.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal case against the petitioner, fourth accused, should be quashed given identical circumstances to previously quashed cases against other accused.
Whether the final report establishes sufficient culpability for the petitioner as compared to directors or legal advisors in the scheme.
Whether the petitioner can benefit from the quashing of cases against co-accused who faced similar allegations.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
John Kurian Periapurath
State of Kerala
Santhosh Thomas
M Sasidharan Nambiar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court