Dismissed

K.S.Jaffer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Jun 2011Crl.MC/678/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner for rape and murder charges. The court held that disputed factual allegations require trial court adjudication and declined interference under the inherent powers of the CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Miscellaneous Case closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to take plea before the trial court.

K.S.Jaffer Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 678 of 2011() ---------------------------------

¶6

SC.151/2010 OF THE IIND ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA. CRIME NO. 111/2008 OF MURICKASSERY POLICE STATION.

¶7

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------

¶8

K.S.JAFFER, AGED 29, S/O.SIDDIQUE, KANJAMADACKAL HOUSE, THOPRANKUDY P.O.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DY.S.P., THODUPUZHA, (CRIME 111/08 MURICKASSERY POLICE STATION), REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

tss

CRMC. 678/2011

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶18

A1:- COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME 111/2008 OF MURICKASSERY POLICE STATION. AII:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE VICTIM/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT. AIII:- COPY OF THE CHARGE/FINAL REPORT TAKEN ON FILE AS SC 151.10. AIV:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DOCTOR DT.D 21.6.08 OF ADIMALY.

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE

tss

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.

¶23

-------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.678 of 2011 -------------------------------------Dated this the 24^th day of June, 2011.

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Petitioner is accused in Crime No.111 of 2008 of Murickassery Police Station and S.C.No.151 of 2010 of the court of learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Thodupuzha for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”). The case was initially registered for offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC based on Annexure-II, statement of the defacto complainant given to the Police on 17.06.2008. In the course of investigation commission of offence punishable under Section 306 was also revealed and accordingly the Investigating Officer submitted AnnexureIII,final report. Petitioner requested to quash proceeding against him on various contentions.

¶26

I have heard both sides. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, allegation of rape cannot stand in the light of the medical certificate.

¶27

Having regard to the nature of allegations made I am inclined to think that the contentions raised being based on disputed facts are to be decided by the trial court at the appropriate stage. I am not inclined to think that his Court should interfere under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶28

¶29

Resultantly without prejudice to the right of petitioner to take appropriate plea/defence before the trial court, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is closed.

¶30

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge.

¶31

cks

K.S.Jaffer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.S.Jaffer 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

T.P.Nishad Ali Vs State of Kerala

Girija Devi Vs State of Kerala

Najma and Another Vs State of Kerala and Another

E.K.Ashraf Vs Benny Mathew

Manoj Vadavath Vs M/S.Cheloor Property Development

Joshy Vs Radha Remanan