Disposed

Anila Sasidharan and Another v. Sasidharan and Another

Kerala HC20 May 2010Crl.MC/1138/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Crl.MC.No.1138 of 2010, the Kerala High Court held that it is premature to consider quashing the private complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the Magistrate has already taken cognizance. The court permitted applicants to seek discharge in absentia. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to plead for discharge in absentia; case disposed of.

Anila Sasidharan and Another Vs Sasidharan and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1138 of 2010(F)

¶6

-------------------------------------(C.C. NO. 452/2009 OF THE J.F.C.M COURT, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT)

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 & 2:

¶8

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

¶9

1. ANILA SASIDAHRAN, D/O.ANANDAVALLY AMMA, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT ANILA NIVAS, EARAM MIDDLE, CHATHANOOR.P.O., KOLLAM.

¶10

2. ANANDAVALLY AMMA, RESIDING AT ANILA NIVAS, EARAM MIDDLE, CHATHANOOR.P.O., KOLLAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.RAVI KRISHNAN.

¶12

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶13

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

¶14

1. SASIDHARAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. ANANDAN UNNITHN, RESIDING AT S.A.NIVAS, KOTTAYAKKARANCHERRI, PARIPALLY VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK & DISTRICT.

¶15

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31.

¶16

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR.

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

prv.

¶19

V.RAMKUMAR, J.

¶20

Crl.M.C. No.1138 of 2010

¶21

Dated this the 20^th day of May , 2010

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioners are accused 2 and 3 in Annexure A, private complaint filed by the husband of the first petitioner, alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 327 and read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the case is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Paravoor as C.C.No.452 of 2009, seeking to quash Annexure A complaint.

¶24

The learned Magistrate has already taken cognizance of the offence. Being a warrant trial case, the Magistrate will have to hear both sides while framing charge. It is too early for this court exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to consider whether Annexure A1 complaint is liable to be quashed. The appropriate remedy of the petitioner is to plead for a discharge at the relevant stage. I am inclined to permit

¶25

Crl.M.C. No.1138/2010 : 2 :

¶26

the petitioners to plead for discharge in absentia. Accordingly, if the petitioners file application for discharge before the Magistrate at the appropriate stage, the same shall be considered without insisting on the personal appearance of the petitioners for the disposal of their discharge application. This Criminal M.C is disposed of as above.

¶27

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶28

dmb

¶29

Crl.M.C. No.1138/2010

¶30

: 3 :

Anila Sasidharan and Another v. Sasidharan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anila Sasidharan and Another v. Sasidharan and Another

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

Prasad @ Pakkaran Vs State of Kerala

Shanalalu Vs the Staton House Officer

Jaffar @ Babu Vs State of Kerala

Sivarajan Vs State of Kerala

Ramachandran and 3 Others Vs Addl.Sub Inspector of Police, Pudukkad

Salahudeen Vs State of Kerala