Dismissed

Mr.Venu v. Agnes

Kerala HC26 Mar 2010Crl.MC/4182/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a revision petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash cognizance of cheating and related offences, the High Court of Kerala held the case could not be quashed at this stage. The court directed the petitioners to raise contentions before the Magistrate seeking discharge under Section 239 CrPC and granted liberty to apply for dispensation of personal presence.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; liberty granted to raise contentions before Magistrate for discharge under Section 239 CrPC and to apply for dispensation of personal presence.

Mr.Venu Vs Agnes — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4182 of 2009()

¶6

------------------------CC.501/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VAIKOM

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1,3 AND 4

¶8

¶9

MR.VENU S/O. T.K. KRISHNAN, 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT SIVALAYAM, PADINJATTUMCHERRY THEKKEMURI, THEKKENADA P.O. VAIKKOM.

¶10

KARUNAKARAN, S/O. ITHA, 89 YEARS, RESIDING AT PANAPARAMBIL, PADIJATTUM CHERIVADAKKEMURY, VAIKOM VILLAGE.

¶11

P.K. CHANDRABABU, S/O. KRISHNAN 55 YEARS RESIDING AT THUNDUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VAIKAPRAYAR KARA VADAKKEMURIYIL VILLAGE.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER

¶13

RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT AND STATE

¶14

¶15

AGNES W/O. PHILIP, RESIDING AT THEEYATTUPARAMBIL, CHERTHALAI VADAKKU VILLAGE, CHERTHALAI P.O.

¶16

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

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U.NAZAR

¶18

ADV. SRI.JOSHI N.THOMAS FOR R1

¶19

SMT.LISSY JOHN FOR R1

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶22

Crl.M.C. No. 4182 OF 2009

¶23

Dated this the 26^th day of March, 2010

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 and first respondent the defacto complainant in C.C. No.501 of 2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vaikkom. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken on Annexure-3 final report for the offences under Sections 415, 420, 209, 379 and 447 read with Section 34 of Indian penal Code.

¶26

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶27

On hearing the learned counsel, I find that the case cannot be quashed as sought for. It is for the petitioners to raise the contentions before the learned Magistrate and seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel submitted that presence of the petitioners may be dispensed with. If petitioners file an application under Section 205 of Code of Criminal Procedure, learned Magistrate not to insist for the presence of the petitioners for the purpose of filing a petition

¶28

Crl.M.C.No.4182/09

¶29

¶30

under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure or for hearing the same.

¶31

Petition is disposed granting liberty to the petitioners to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate and seek discharge under Rule 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶32

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, (JUDGE )

¶33

vps

¶34

Crl.M.C.No.4182/09

¶35

Mr.Venu v. Agnes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Venu v. Agnes

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

Jayaprakash Vs C.B.I

K.B.Mohanan Vs Prasannakumar T. and Another

Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala

Marx & 2 Others Vs State of Kerala and Another

Sudarsanan Vs State of Kerala

Sumathy S.Menon Vs Rajendran T.K.