Disposed

Rajan v. K. Gopinathan Nair

Kerala HC13 Feb 2012Crl.MC/126/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.PC, the accused sought to quash a Final Report under the Abkari Act alleging no material evidence to connect him to the offence. The Court disposed of the petition without quashing, granting liberty to approach the trial court for discharge under Section 227 Cr.PC instead, remanding the matter to the Additional Sessions Judge before fram

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with liberty to petitioner to seek discharge under Section 227 Cr.PC before Additional Sessions Judge; exemption from personal appearance reserved by trial court.

Rajan Vs K. Gopinathan Nair — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. P.S.GOPINATHAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/24TH MAGHA 1933

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 126 of 2012

¶6

SC.205/2010 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), MAVELIKKARA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

RAJAN

¶9

S/O. RAGHAVA KURUP, RAGHAVA NILAYAM, THIRUVAMURI PANIYOOR VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPPALLY, CHENGANNUR ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR

¶11

SRI.T.K.ANANDA KRISHNAN

¶12

SRI.P.ARAVIND

¶13

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶14

K. GOPINATHAN NAIR

¶15

PREVENTIVE OFFICER, EXCISE RANGE, CHANGANNUR- 689 121.

¶16

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶17

HIGH COURT BUILDING, ERNAKULAM.

¶18

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN.

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶20

ON 13-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

P.S. GOPINATHAN, J.

¶22

= = = = = = = = = = = CRL. M.C. 126 OF 2012

¶23

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶24

DATED THIS, THE 13^th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2012.

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

¶27

the petitioner, who is the accused in S.C. 205 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track ( Adhoc) Mavelikkara, seeks an order to quash Annexure II Final Report alleging offence under Section 55(a) and 55(i) of the Abkari Act with a plea that there is no material on record other than the so called confession statement by the first accused to connect the petitioner. According to the petitioner, there is no whisper in the statement of any of the witnesses including the detecting officer to establish the complicity of the petitioner with the offence alleged.

¶28

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I find that this is a matter to be looked into by the Additional Sessions Judge before framing charge. Petitioner can advance the argument before the Additional Sessions Judge and seek for discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶29

CRL. M.C. 126/2012

¶30

¶31

In the result, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to advance a plea for discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the event such an application is filed, the learned Sessions Judge shall dispose of the same before framing charge. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought for an order to exempt the petitioner from personal appearance. That is a matter to be looked into by the trial court on appropriate proceedings.

¶32

P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE)

¶33

knc/-

Rajan v. K. Gopinathan Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan v. K. Gopinathan Nair

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

Jeswin Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Azeez Babu Vs State of Kerala

Ameer K.K. Vs State of Kerala

Bijumon @ Biju Karnan Vs State of Kerala

Sabin Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Syed Vs State of Kerala