Disposed

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

Kerala HC20 May 2010Crl.MC/615/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held it is too early to quash proceedings for offenses under Section 3 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. It directed the petitioners to seek discharge before the Magistrate. The Court implicitly allowed the application to file for discharge without personal appearance.

What did the court decide?

The Court permitted the petitioners to file an application for discharge before the Magistrate in absentia without personal appearance.

Ramachandran and 3 Others Vs Addl.Sub Inspector of… — 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. 615 of 2010()

¶6

¶7

CC.321/2002 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA

¶8

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NOS.2 TO 5

¶9

RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.CHAKKETH ACHUTHAN NAIR, RAPPAL DESOM, PARAPPUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

SIDHAN @ SIDHARTHAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.KARAVATTU VEETTIL VASU, PARAPPUKKARA DESOM, PARAPPUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶11

SUNIL, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.KALLAYIL VELAYUDHAN, RAPPAL DESOM, PARAPPUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶12

SAJEEV KUMAR, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.KANDEDATH NARAYANAN, RAPPAL DESOM, PARAPPUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY

¶14

RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT

¶15

ADDL.SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUDUKKAD POLICE STATION.

¶16

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

¶17

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWICK

¶18

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

¶19

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶20

= = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C..No.615 of 2010

¶21

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20^th day of May, 2010 ORDER

¶22

Petitioners, who are accused Nos.2 to 5 in crime No.3/2002 of Puthukkad Police Station for offences punishable under Section 3 and 7(1)(b) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, seek to quash Annexure B final report and further proceedings in C.C.No.321 of 2002 on the file of the J.F.C.M, Irinjalakuda.

¶23

It is too early for this Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to hold that the prosecution of the petitioner is groundless and the same is liable to be quashed. The appropriate remedy of the petitioners is to plead for a discharge before the Magistrate.

¶24

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to permit the petitioners to plead for a discharge in absentia. Accordingly if the petitioners file an application for discharge before the Magistrate through their counsel, the Magistrate shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioners for the disposal of the discharge petition.

¶25

This Crl.M.C is disposed of reserving the above right of the petitioners.

¶26

Dated this the 20^th day of May, 2010.

¶27

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶28

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Salahudeen Vs State of Kerala

Anila Sasidharan and Another Vs Sasidharan and Another