Disposed

Kunjumol v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Feb 2012Crl.MC/192/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court rejected a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings for offences under Sections 225 and 225B IPC. The court held no circumstances warranted invoking inherent jurisdiction and disposed of the matter without prejudice to the defence.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without prejudice to defence; liberty granted to seek avoiding arrest or stopping proceedings under Section 258 CrPC.

Kunjumol Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE. P.S.GOPINATHAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/2ND PHALGUNA 1933

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 192 of 2012 ()

¶6

CC.367/2010 of J.M.F.C-I,KOTTAYAM

¶7

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

KUNJUMOL, W/O.JAYAKUMAR, B.S.N.L QUARTERS NO.O II 5, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.V.K.SUNIL

¶10

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-02-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

DSV/-

¶15

P.S.GOPINATHAN, J.

¶16

Crl.M.C.NO. 192 OF 2012

¶17

Dated this the 21^st day of February,2012

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner, who is the 2^nd

¶20

accused in C.C.No.367/2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I , Kottayam for offences under Sections 225 and 225B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, seeks an order to quash all further proceedings in Annexure IV final report with a plea that the offences alleged are not made out against the petitioner.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perusing documents including the Annexure II report filed by the Amin before the Principal Munsiff, Kottyam, I cannot agree with the

¶22

Crl.M.C.NO. 192 OF 2012 2

¶23

argument advanced by the petitioner. However, I am not expressing any opinion on merits as that may prejudicially affect the defence of the petitioner. In the event, no offence is made out by the final report, the petitioner can very well seek for an order for stopping all further proceedings under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I find no circumstance warranting to invoke jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the result, this petition is disposed of without prejudice to the defence and with liberty to the petitioner to seek for stopping all further proceedings under Section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner

¶25

Crl.M.C.NO. 192 OF 2012 3

¶26

submitted that the petitioner is an ailing lady and she is not able to appear before the trial court on all posting dates and prayed for an order to exempt her from personal appearance. This is a matter to be looked into by the trial court on appropriate application. In the event such an application is filed, the learned Magistrate shall dispose of the same on merits.

P.S.GOPINATHAN

JUDGE

/True copy/

P.A.To Judge

DSV/-

Crl.M.C.NO. 192 OF 2012 4

Kunjumol v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunjumol 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

Vijayan @ Karate Vijayan Vs the State of Kerala

Patric Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Jaseer K.K. Vs State of Kerala

Arun Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Vikas Viswan Vs Lakshmi

P.a.Shamsudeen Vs State of Kerala