Allowed

Harikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jun 2011Crl.MC/1130/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against accused persons for offenses of cheating and breach of trust arising from a defaulted hire-purchase loan. The court allowed the plea based on a settlement reached between the petitioners and the second respondent, noting the underlying dispute was purely civil in nature and settled.

What did the court decide?

Final report and criminal proceedings against petitioners in C.C. No.1070 of 2004 and Crime No.749 of 2004 are quashed.

Harikrishnan Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1130 of 2011()

¶6

------------------------CC.1070/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, THRISSUR

¶7

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2:

¶8

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

¶9

1. HARIKRISHNAN,AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN,PALLATHU HOUSE,CHERPU, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

2. K.A.MOHANAN,AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.APPUKUTTAN,KALLADA HOUSE,P.O.MOORKKANIKKARA, KOZHUKKULLI VILLAGE,THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶13

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

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

2. M/S.ASOK LEYLAND FINANCE LTD,

¶16

BRANCH OFFICE,BAKER'S COMPLEX,PAZHAYA NADAKKAVU, M.G.ROAD,THRISSUR,WHICH IS LATER AMALGAMATED AND NOW FUNCTIONING AS M/S.INDUS IND BANK LTD,SHALOM TOWERS,34/138B,BYE PASS NORTH END,EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24.

¶17

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAJESH (AROOR)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Kss

¶20

THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.1130 of 2011

¶22

Dated this 08^th day of June, 2011

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.749 of 2004 of Thrissur East Police Station and C.C.N.1070 of 2004 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thrissur for offences punishable under Secs.403, 406, 420 and 424 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was registered on a complaint preferred by the second respondent, M/s.Asok Leyland Finance Limited alleging that first petitioner availed a hire purchase loan for purchase of a car, defaulted payment of installment and concealed the vehicle to prevent the first petitioner repossessing it. Petitioners request this Court to quash proceeding on the strength of a settlement reached with M/s.IndusInd Bank Ltd with which, it is stated, the second respondent got amalgamated. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶25

The Executive (Legal) and Authorised Representative of M/s.IndusInd Bank Ltd has sworn an affidavit on behalf of the second respondent where it is stated that M/s.Asok Leyland Finance Limited has amalgamated with M/s.IndusInd Bank Ltd. It

¶26

Crl.M.C.No.1130 of 2011

¶27

-: 2 :-

¶28

is also stated that the dispute between parties is settled, second respondent does not wish to prosecute the case further and has no objection in quashing proceeding in C.C.No.1070 of 2004. Learned counsel on both sides confirmed the settlement. Learned counsel for second respondent has confirmed settlement and authenticity of affidavit sworn by the authorised signatory on behalf of M/s.IndusInd Bank Ltd with which learned counsel submits, the second respondent has amalgamated since filing the complaint.

¶29

Since the allegation concerns default in payment of installments which is purely a matter between petitioners and the second respondent and that dispute is settled, I am inclined to interfere.

¶30

Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Final report in Crime No. 749 of 2004 of Thrissur East Police Station and proceeding against petitioner in C.C.No.1070 of 2004 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thrissur are quashed.

¶31

(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶32

Sbna/-

Harikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harikrishnan 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

M/S.Kottayam Golden Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Kerala

M/S.Kottayam Golden Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Kerala

Mr.Johnkutty Vs State of Kerala

Aji Somanath Vs the D.G.of Police

Gayathri Nandakumar Vs State of Kerala

Premachandra Kumar Vs State of Kerala