Dismissed

Mansoor.a.B. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Sept 2018Crl.MC/1504/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In criminal miscellaneous proceedings under Section 482 CrPC filed to quash charges for cheating and forgery, the court held that once the final report is filed, inherent powers cannot be invoked to challenge the FIR disclosures. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. No. 1504 of 2017 dismissed; petitioner directed to take appropriate steps regarding the final report.

Mansoor.a.B. Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

TUESDAY ,THE 04TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 13TH BHADRA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1504 of 2017

¶6

CMP 9756/2016 of J.M.F.C.-I, THODUPUZHA CRIME NO. 929 OF 2016 OF MUTTOM POLICE STATION, THODUPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

MANSOOR.A.B. AGED 33 YEARS S/O.BASHEER, AYNALIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONJASSERY P.O.PERUMBAVOOR 683 547.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI. VINAY RAMDAS

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA (CRIME NO.929/2016-S.H.O., MUTTOM POLICE STATION,THODUPUZHA) REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

ADDL. PRASATH C., AGED 38 YEARS, S/O CHELLAPPAN, R2 17/855 A-1, SREEKOVIL (ANU'S VILLA), MUNDAMVELI P.O., KOCHI - 682 507

¶13

***** ADDL.R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21.03.2017 IN CRL.M.A. NO. 2616/2017

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.B.JAYASURYA SR. PP

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 1504 of 2017

¶18

..2..

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶21

2. The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No. 929 of 2016 of Muttom Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The prayer is to quash the proceedings on the ground that the allegations do not disclose commission of any offence by the petitioner.

¶22

3. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that final report

¶23

has already been filed and the Crl.M.C. has become infructuous.

¶24

4. Since final report has already been filed, this court cannot consider the contention that the FIR does not disclose commission of any offence by the petitioner.

¶25

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the final report, he may take appropriate steps to redress his grievance.

Sd/-

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

Judge

..3..

Crl.MC.No. 1504 of 2017

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS:

¶33

ANNEXURE-I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.929/2016 OF MUTTOM POLICE STATION

¶34

ANNEXURE-II CERTIFIED COPY OF THE C.M.P NO.9756/2016 DATED 4/10/2016 FILED BEFORE THE JFCM COURT, THODUPUZHA

¶35

ANNEXURE-III

¶36

TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE MUTTOM POLICE IN CRIME NO.929/2016 FOR TAKING CUSTODY OF THE BMW CAR BEARING REGISTRATION NUMBER KL-43-A-6677 DATED 19/12/2016

¶37

ANNEXURE-IV TRUE COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 26/12/2016 IN CRIME NO.929/16

¶38

RESPONDENT'S/S' EXHIBITS:

¶39

ANNEXURE-R2A COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 30.08.2016 GIVEN TO THE STATE POLICE CHIEF

¶40

BKA/05.09.18

Mansoor.a.B. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mansoor.a.B. 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

G.Sreekumari Vs Girijakumari L

G.Sreekumari Vs Prem.J.Das

Dr.C.v.James Vs Mr.Sirosh P.John

Tholoor Pisharikal Sree Karthiayani Temple Committee Vs State of Kerala

Sindhu Vs the State of Kerala

punnala sreekumar Vs state of kerala