Disposed

M.a.Mushthaf Ahammed v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Jun 2011Crl.MC/374/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashment of an FIR under IPC Sections 420, 403, and 409. The court held that since the police had submitted a final report, the petitioner could seek discharge before the Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous case was closed without prejudice; the petitioner was directed to seek discharge before the Magistrate under Section 239 CrPC.

M.a.Mushthaf Ahammed Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 374 of 2010(B) -----------------------------------[CRIME NO.25/2010 OF THENJIPALAM POLICE STATION] ....................

¶4

PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED:

¶5

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

¶6

M.A.MUSHTHAF AHAMMED, S/O.M.A.MAJEED, AGED 33 YEARS, MANGALASSERY HOUSE, A.R.NAGAR P.O., THIRURANGADI (VIA), MALAPPURAM DIST.

¶7

BY ADVS. SRI.T.V.GEORGE, SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL).

¶8

RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/2ND ACCUSED:

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

2. SMT.K.MEERAKUMARI, W/O.N.SUNDARAN, NADUTHODI HOUSE, AMBALAKANDI PARAMBU, CHENATHALANGADI P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-PIN-673 636.

¶12

3. SRI.SHAJI, (NADUTHODI), S/O.NANU, AGED 35 YEARS, KARIMADATHIL HOUSE, KOYAPPA PADAM, THENHIPALAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST.

¶13

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU, R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN.

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

prv.

¶16

THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.

¶17

Crl.M.C.No.374 of 2010

¶18

Dated this 03^rd day of June, 2011

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.25 of 2010 of Thenjipalam Police Station for offences punishable under Secs.420, 403 and 409 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered on a complaint preferred by the second respondent against petitioner and third respondent. According to the petitioner, allegations in the complaint are not sufficient to show that petitioner has committed any offence as alleged. Hence it is prayed that the complaint and FIR to the extent it concerned petitioner may be quashed. Learned counsel for second respondent submitted that instruction given to him is that the police is understood to have submitted final report. If according to the petitioner, allegations in the complaint, FIR and final report (if any submitted against petitioner) did not make out any case against him as alleged, it is open to the petitioner to seek discharge before the learned Magistrate as provided under Sec.239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.374 of 2010

¶22

-: 2 :-

¶23

Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is closed without prejudice to the right of petitioner to raise appropriate plea/defence before the learned Magistrate as provided under law.

¶24

(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶25

Sbna/-

¶26

/True Copy/

¶27

P.A to Judge

M.a.Mushthaf Ahammed v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.a.Mushthaf Ahammed 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

Prasannan Vs State of Kerala

Fr.John Puthuran Vs Mr.K.v.Eliyas and Another

Asharaf & Another Vs the State of Kerala & Anr.

Vijayalakshmi Vs State of Kerala

Sindhu Vs State of Kerala

V.Gopi and Another Vs State of Kerala and Another