Allowed

Nirmala v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Mar 2016Crl.MC/1974/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an order initiating proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C. The court held that the mere fact of being an accused in one criminal case was insufficient to satisfy the requirements for such proceedings and quashed the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. No. 1974 of 2015 allowed and Annexure-A7 order under Section 107 Cr.P.C. quashed.

Nirmala Vs State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/28TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1974 of 2015 ()

¶6

M.C.NO.41/2014 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PERINTHALMANNA.

¶7

PETITIONER/1STOPPOSITE PARTY:

¶8

NIRMALA, W/O.SUNDARAN, PUTHUPARAMBIL (H), AMARAMBALAM AMSOM, PARAKKAPADAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI - 682031.

¶12

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOKKOTTUMPADAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679332.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 1974 of 2015 ()

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:

¶19

ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17.01.2014. ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 29.05.2014. ANNEXURE A3: TRUE COPY FO THE FIR NO.153 DATED 05.05.2014. ANNEXURE A4: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 212/2014 DATED 16.07.2014. ANNEXURE A5: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.323 DATED 15.11.2014. ANNEXURE A6: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO. 141/2015 DATED 16.02.2014. ANNEXURE A7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MC.NO.41/14 DATED 11.03.2015.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶26

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

¶27

Crl.M.C. No. 1974 of 2015

¶28

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

¶29

Dated this the 18^th day of March, 2016

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

The petitioner is challenging Annexure-A7 order

¶32

passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Perinthalmanna in M.C.No.41/2014, for initiating steps under Section 107 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. In Annexure-A7 order, it has been alleged that the petitioner is involved in five crimes referred therein.

¶33

According to the petitioner, she happened to be an accused in one crime registered as Crime No.2121/2014 of the Pookkottumpadam Police Station. Apart from that, she had never become an accused in any other criminal case. The learned Public Prosecutor has fairly conceded that the petitioner is an accused in Crime No.2121/2014 of the Pookkottumpadam Police Station only and not in any other case noted in the impugned order.

¶34

Crl.M.C. No. 1974 of 2015

¶35

-: 2 :-

¶36

In order to initiate proceedings under Section

¶37

107 Cr.P.C., there must be satisfaction on the part of the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate that the continuance of that particular person at the locality would result in the breach of the peace in the locality or that he/she would be likely to commit any offfence against public tranquility. The mere fact that the petitioner happened to be an accused in one criminal case, is not sufficient to conclude that the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate is satisfied that the continuance of the petitioner in the locality would result in breach of the peace or that she is likely to commit any offence against public tranquility. Annexure-A7 order is per se illegal, irregular and improper and the same is liable to be quashed.

¶38

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-A7 order is hereby quashed.

¶39

Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶40

stu

Nirmala v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala 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

Arshad.P.K Vs Shoshamma Shaji

Sosamma Vs State of Kerala

Fasal Ul Rahman Vs State of Kerala

Ajimon Varghese Vs State of Kerala

A.Ranjith Arayanan Vs the State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala