Dismissed

J.Sunny Lopez v. Asha Thomas

Kerala HC11 Jan 2016Crl.MC/798/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case involved accused petitioners charged with public nuisance, theft, criminal mischief, and criminal intimidation regarding compound wall demolition between familial property clusters. The court refused to weigh evidence or adjudicate the merits at this stage, directing parties to proceed to trial in the pending Criminal Case.

What did the court decide?

The court returned the Crl.M.C. to the trial court with liberty to the petitioner to repeat contentions during the trial.

J.Sunny Lopez Vs Asha Thomas — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/21ST POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 798 of 2014 ()

¶6

CC. NO.2017/2013 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, NEYYATTINKARA. CRIME NO. 963/2013 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶8

1. J. SUNNY LOPEZ, S/O.LATE R. JOSEPH LOPEZ, NICELS, T.C.48/965, MILMA JUNCTION, AMBALATHARA, POONTHURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695 026.

¶9

2. J. BIBIN LOPEZ, S/O.LATE R. JOSEPH LOPEZ, TREEZA VILLA, OOTTILKKALPARAMBU, KOTTAPPURAM P.O., VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695 521.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL, SRI.A.CHANDRA BABU.

¶11

RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶12

1. ASHA THOMAS, D/O. VAREETHA LOPEZ, MINI HOUSE, OOTTILKKALPARAMBU, NEAR OLD BRIDGE, KOTTAPPURAM P.O., VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN: 695 521.

¶13

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

¶14

R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE.

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 798 of 2014

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-

¶20

ANNEXURE I:	TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.608/2007 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE II:	TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.401/2008 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE III:	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/02/2009 IN I.A NO.5186/2008 IN OS NO.794/2008 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA.
ANNEXURE IV:	TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER DATED 31/08/2010 IN I.A NO.1914/2009 IN OS NO.794/2008 PASSED BY THE 2ND ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF'S COURT, NEYYATTINKARA.
ANNEXURE V:	TRUE COPY FO THE JUDGMENT DATED 11/03/2011 IN C.M.APPEAL NO.24/2010 PASSED BY THE SUB COURT, NEYYATTINKARA.
ANNEXURE VI:	TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.811/2010 DATED 15/12/2010 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE VII:	TRUE COPY FO THE COMPLAINT DATED 02/07/2013.
ANNEXURE VIII:	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11/07/2013.
ANNEXURE IX:	CERTIFIED COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.963/13 DATED 11/07/2013 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE X:	CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.963/13 OF VIZHINJAM POLICE STATION.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶26

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

¶27

CRL.M.C.No.798 of 2014

¶28

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

¶29

Dated this the 11^th day of January, 2016

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶32

the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent.

¶33

The petitioners are accused in Crime No.963 of

¶34

2013 of the Vizhinjam Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 294(b), 447, 427 and 506(i) IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The investigation is over and the Final Report has been filed in the matter. Presently the matter is pending as C.C.No.2017 of 2013 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II, Neyyattinkara.

¶35

According to the petitioners, earlier there was an attack as against the property of the petitioners and consequently Annexure-I and Annexure-II were registered. Thereafter, the mother of the petitioners had filed O.S.No.794 of 2008 before the II Additional Munsiff’s Court,

¶36

CRL.M.C.No.798 of 2014 -: 2 :-

¶37

Neyyattinkara, in which Annexure-IV injunction order was passed. As per the said Annexure-IV, it seems that the compound wall of the property of the petitioners was partly demolished. An order of temporary injunction was passed against the 1^st respondent from committing trespass into the property of the petitioners.

¶38

Learned counsel for the 1^st respondent has pointed out that the property belongs to the petitioners is having an extent of around 27 cents, whereas the property of the 1^st respondent is having only an extent of 6 cents. She is residing in the building situated in the said 6 cents of property. The order of temporary injunction as per AnnexureIV is limited to the 27 cents of property of the petitioners. The order of temporary injunction was passed through Annexure-IV on 31.08.2010.

¶39

The present allegation is that on 07.07.2013 at 11 a.m., the petitioners had trespassed into the property of the 1^st respondent by demolishing a portion of the compound wall, where the gate was affixed and thereafter, they

¶40

CRL.M.C.No.798 of 2014 -: 3 :-

¶41

criminally intimidated the 1^st respondent and abused her.

¶42

There is absolutely nothing to invite an offence

¶43

under Section 294(b) IPC. The filthy language allegedly used by the petitioners have not been re-porduced in the Final Report. At the same time, it cannot be said that the demolition of the compound wall of the petitioners, which were allegedly committed in the year 2010 and the present demolition of the compound wall of the 1^st respondent as alleged in the present case are one and the same. Those matters are based on evidence. This Court cannot go into the intrinsic particulars of the evidence collected by the investigating officer and weigh the evidence properly. Let the parties go for the trial of the case.

¶44

With liberty to the petitioner to take up the very same contentions during trial, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶47

DSV/12/1/16

¶48

// True Copy // P.A. To Judge

J.Sunny Lopez v. Asha Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.Sunny Lopez v. Asha Thomas

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

Ramsheena Vs State of Kerala

Jomon Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Pattathil Prabeesh Vs Abdul Mansoor

Ramanan Vs State of Kerala

Lalan Vs M.S.Sandeep

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala