Allowed

Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Feb 2010Crl.MC/404/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash cognizance taken by a Judicial First Class Magistrate. The court held that cognizance under the Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act violations is exclusively the domain of the authorized officer under Section 25, citing precedents. The criminal cases were quashed, but the quashing did not bar a

What did the court decide?

Criminal cases C.C.1159/2009 and C.C.1695/2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor are quashed.

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931

¶4

Crl.MC.No. 404 of 2010()

¶5

----------------------------------CC.1695/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ADOOR CRIME NO.341/2008 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION. ....................

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 AND 2

¶7

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

¶8

1. MANIKANDAN, S/O. KRISHNA PILLAI, KARINGODATHU HOUSE, THONNALLOOR MURI, KURAMBALA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶9

2. R. MADHU, S/O. RAGHAVAN PILLAI, KARINGODATHU HOUSE, THONNALLOOR MURI, KURAMBALA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. MR.SAKIR.K.H.

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶12

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

¶13

THE STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDALAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U. NAZAR.

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, ALONG WITH CRMC NO.411 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶18

CRL.M.C.NO.404 & 411 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------- Dated 17^th February 2010

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petitioners in Crl.M.C.404/2010

¶21

are the accused in C.C.1695/2008 and

¶22

petitioners in Crl.M.C.411/2010 are the accused in C.C.1159/2009 on the file of

¶23

Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor. Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 20, 21 and 23 of Protection of River Banks and Regulation

¶24

of Removal of Sand Act on Annexure-A1

¶25

final report submitted by the Sub

¶26

Inspector of Police, Pandalam in both the cases. Petitions are filed under Section

¶27

482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash

¶28

the cognizance taken contending that cognizance taken is bad as it is violative

¶29

Crmc 404 & 411/10

¶30

¶31

of Section 25 of the Act.

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for the

¶33

petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶34

Under Section 25 of the Act no court

¶35

can take cognizance of the offence under the Act except on a complaint filed by the officer authorised under the Act. Question has been

¶36

settled by this court in Sherif and others v.

¶37

Sub Inspector of Police, Konni and another

¶38

(2010 (1) KLD 109) following the Division Bench decision in Moosakoya v. State of Kerala (2008

¶39

(1) KLT 538), as approved by the Apex court in

¶40

Jeevankumar Raut v. Central Bureau of

¶41

Investigation (AIR 2009 SC 2763). Hence

¶42

cognizance taken can only be quashed.

¶43

Petition is allowed. C.C.1159/2009 and C.C.1695/2008 on the file of Judicial First

¶44

¶45

Crmc 404 & 411/10

¶46

Class Magistrate, Adoor are quashed. But quashing of the cognizance taken will not prevent the authorised officer to file a complaint and the Magistrate to take cognizance as provided under Section 25 of

¶47

the Act.

¶48

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.

¶49

uj.

Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manikandan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

O.K.Nandakumar Vs State of Kerala

Santha Devi Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Azeez Vs State of Kerala

Shaiju Vs the State of Kerala and Another

M.K.Muhammed Aslam Vs Mohammed Ashraf & Another

Kunhalavi Vs State of Kerala