Allowed

Febin v. the Sub Divisional Magistrate

Kerala HC2 Jul 2018Crl.MC/2302/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed maintenance proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C. initiated on a police report against the petitioner, as the notice lacked disclosure of offence details and the grounds were insufficient.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous case was allowed and the maintenance proceedings in M.C. No.242 of 2018 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Alappuzha were quashed.

Febin Vs the Sub Divisional Magistrate — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2018 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 2302 of 2018

¶6

M.C.NO. 242/2018 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ALAPPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER:-

¶8

FEBIN, AGED 26 YEARS,S/O ANTONY,NADUVILATHARA HOUSE, ERAMALLOR.P.O,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688537.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.RAAJESH S.SUBRAHMANIAN SRI.V.R.RAJESH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, ALAPPUZHA-688001.

¶12

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AROOR POLICE STATION,ALAPPUZHA-688537,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,KOCHI,ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶13

BY SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S. HRITHWIK

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No. 2302 of 2018 ()

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶18

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.03.2018 IN M.C.242/2018 OF COURT OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE,ALAPPUZHA.

¶19

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED 14/03/2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶20

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PA TO JUDGE

sdr/5.7.18

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW J.

¶25

Crl.M.C. No.2302 of 2018

¶26

Dated this the 2^nd day of July, 2018

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The petitioner is the respondent in M.C. No.242 of 2018 on the file of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Alappuzha. On a report received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Aroor, the learned Magistrate initiated proceedings against the petitioner under Section 107 Cr.P.C. and issued him Annexure-A1 notice directing him to show cause why he should not be asked to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to keep the peace. This is challenged in this Crl.M.C.

¶29

Heared the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶30

I have perused Annexure-A1 notice issued by the learned Magistrate and the report filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, Aroor. The only reason stated for initiating proceedings against

¶31

Crl.M.C. 2302 /18

¶32

-:2:-

¶33

the petitioner is the registration of a case against the petitioner as Crime No.1357 of 2017 of Aroor Police Station.

¶34

The order does not disclose even the offences or the nature of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner in Crime No.1357 of 2017. But it appears that the allegation is that when the police attempted to arrest certain persons who were consuming alcohol at a public place, the petitioner obstructed the police from effecting arrest. That alone cannot be a ground to initiate proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C. That apart the particulars of the allegations do not find a place in Annexure-A1 notice. For these two reasons I am inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner to quash the proceedings.

¶35

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The proceedings in M.C. No.242 of 2018 on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Alappuzha are quashed.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶38

vps 4/7

¶39

/True Copy/

¶40

PS to Judge

Febin v. the Sub Divisional Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Febin v. the Sub Divisional Magistrate

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

Chathu Vs State of Kerala

J. Komalan Vs State of Kerala

Biju Vs State of Kerala

Pushparaj Vs State of Kerala

Bismil Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar @ Kumar Vs State of Kerala