Allowed

Babu Joseph v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jul 2018Crl.MC/3541/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings under sections 294(b) and 506(1) IPC instituted against a practicing lawyer for alleged abuse of his former clerk. Holding the dispute arose from a mistaken fact that was subsequently resolved, the court invoked its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to end the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Criminal M.C. No. 3541 of 2018 allowed; all further proceedings in CC No. 762 of 2018 stood quashed.

Babu Joseph 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 SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 29TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3541 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 762/2018 of J.M.F.C.-I(FOREST OFFENCES),TPA

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

BABU JOSEPH S/O. JOSEPH, AGED 70 YEARS, MANARKATTU HOUSE, VENGALLOOR KARA, KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 608.

¶9

BY ADV.SRI.A.P.SUBHASH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2. SARITHA RAKESH, W/O. RAKESH, AGED 34 YEARS, CHIRAKKAL, PURAPPUZHA P.O., PURAPPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 583.

¶13

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.V.RAJENDRAN NAIR

¶14

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR:SMT M K PUSHPALATHA

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-07-2018, COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 3541 of 2018 ()

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶19

ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT OF C.C.762/2018 OF JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- I, THODUPUZHA.

¶20

ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE F1 STATEMENT DATED 04.02.2018, GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NUMBER 218/2018 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.

¶21

ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE 161 STATEMENT OF SOUMYA DATED 04.02.2018, IN CRIME NUMBER 218/2018 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.

¶22

ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE 161 STATEMENT OF NISHA DATED 04.02.2018, IN CRIME NUMBER 218/2018 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.

¶23

ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE 161 STATEMENT OF RAJESH DATED 25.02.2018, IN CRIME NUMBER 218/2018 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.

¶24

ANNEXURE A6 A TRUE COPY OF THE 161 STATEMENT OF JOHN DATED 25.02.2018, IN CRIME NUMBER 218/2018 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.

¶25

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL

¶26

True Copy / P A to Judge

¶27

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶28

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

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.3541 of 2018

¶30

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

¶31

Dated this the 20^th day of July, 2018

¶32

ORDER

¶33

Petitioner herein, who is a practicing lawyer, allegedly abused the defacto complainant, who is the second respondent herein, who was earlier, his advocate clerk.

¶34

Defacto complainant laid the complaint alleging commission of offences punishable under sections 294(b) and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code. Crime was registered and the matter is now pending as C.C.No.762 of 2018 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thodupuzha. Petitioner herein seeks to quash the proceedings contending that the dispute arose out of a mistaken fact and that, after having realized it, both parties have resolved it. He relies on the affidavit affirmed by the defacto complainant produced as Ext.R2(A). Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that, in the light of Ext.R2(A), criminal proceedings can be quashed. Learned Public Prosecutor stated that the statement of the victim has been recorded, which reiterated the settlement.

¶35

Considering these facts, I am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the entire criminal proceedings.

¶36

Crl.M.C.3541/18

¶37

¶38

In the result, Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C.No.762 of 2018 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thodupuzha will stand quashed.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

SUNIL THOMAS Judge

¶41

Sbna/20/7/18

¶42

True Copy / P A to Judge

Babu Joseph v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Joseph 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

Sajeev Vasudevan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Rahul Renjan Vs the State of Kerala

Abdu Rahiman Vs the State of Kerala

Anzil Vs State of Kerala

Prasannachandran Vs K.N. Vijayamma

Raghu Vs State of Kerala