Dismissed

Jacobkutty @ Shaji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Nov 2010Crl.MC/3742/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. No. 3742 of 2010. The petitioner challenged the Judicial Magistrate's cognizance based on the final report. The High Court rejected the petition, upholding the Magistrate's action and allowing the petitioner to seek discharge or protest complaint under relevant CPC sections.

What did the court decide?

Petition to quash cognizance and direct investigation was rejected. Petitioner advised to file discharge petition or protest complaint.

Jacobkutty @ Shaji Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3742 of 2010()

¶6

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

¶7

CRIME NO. 923/2010 IN OS.113/1993 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM

¶8

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED

¶9

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

¶10

JACOBKUTTY @ SHAJI, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, VELLACKAL VEEDU, KUDAYAMPADI MARIYATHURUTHUKARAYIL, AYYAMANAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

*** ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED**

¶16

*** ADDL. R2 : LISSY JOSE, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O. LATE V.M.JOSE VELLAKKAL HOUSE UDAYAM PADIKARA AYAMANAM, KOTTAYAM.**

¶17

*** ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 19/10/10 IN CRL MA.6132/2010.**

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V. PRAMOD

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

sts

¶21

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶22

=========================== CRL.M.C.No. 3742 OF 2010

¶23

===========================

¶24

Dated this the 18^th day of November,2010

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petition is filed under section 482 of Code

¶27

of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure A9 final report taken cognizance for the offence under section 354 and 452 of Indian Penal Code

¶28

by Judicial First Class Magistrate Court III, Kottayam and to direct investigation of Annexure A4 and A7 F.I.Rs by an officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police. It is on investigation of Annexure A4, F.I.R Annexure A9 final report was submitted. Annexure A7 F.I.R is registered based on a complaint filed by the petitioner and sent for investigation under section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶29

Learned counsel appearing for the

¶30

petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were

Crl.M.C.3742/2010

heard.

Though learned counsel appearing for the

¶35

petitioner argued that learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance on Annexure A9 final report, based on the materials produced, I cannot agree. It is up to the petitioner to raise the contentions before the learned Magistrate. Petitioner is at liberty to file a petition under section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure and seek an order of

¶36

discharge raising all the contentions raised herein.

¶37

Though learned counsel appearing for the

¶38

petitioner submitted that no investigation was conducted on Annexure A7 F.I.R, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that after completing the

¶39

investigation, a refer report was submitted on

¶40

10.7.2010. If petitioner is aggrieved, he is

¶41

entitled to file a protest complaint before the

¶42

learned Magistrate. If the Magistrate has not given notice to the petitioner before accepting the final report, acceptance of report will not affect

¶43

Crl.M.C.3742/2010 3

¶44

the right of the petitioner to file a protest complaint.

¶45

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶46

tpl/-

¶47

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶48

W.P.(C).NO. /06

¶49

--------------------JUDGMENT

¶50

SEPTEMBER,2006

Jacobkutty @ Shaji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jacobkutty @ Shaji v. State of Kerala

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

Dr.Sabeena Nadir Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Sageer Vs Shamna

Azad Vs State of Kerala

Manappuram General Finance and Leasing Vs State of Kerala & Another

Biju @ Pindi Biju Vs Sindhu

Joby Jacob Vs State of Kerala