Francis v. Rocky
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal Miscellaneous petition to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that executing a property document where the signatory lacks title does not constitute forgery, and set aside the Magistrate's order taking cognizance.
What did the court decide?
Proceedings in C.C.No.2513 of 2015 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Njarackal are quashed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 18TH ASHADHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 1250 of 2018
CC NO. 2513/2015 IN CMP NO. 127/2015 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, NJARAKKAL
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1
FRANCIS, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O. AUGUSTINE, KOLLANASSERY, PIZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.B.SANDEEP SMT.R.PRIYA SMT.C.C.BINDHYA SMT.SHERIN VARGHESE SRI.B.SURJITH SMT.K.P.SREEJA SRI.M.J.KIRANKUMAR SMT.R.ANJANA
RESPONDENT(S)/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE:
1. ROCKY S/O. DEVASSY, AGED 64 YEARS, CHAMBAMKULATHU, PIZHALA, KADAMAKKUDY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 682 027.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether executing a document in respect of property to which the executor has no right amounts to forgery under IPC.
Whether the Magistrate was right in taking cognizance of the offence under alleged IPC sections.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Francis
- respondent
Rocky
Coram
K. Abraham Mathew
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court