The Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings for cheating against the petitioners. The court ruled that the dispute over property sale restrictions was a civil matter involving breach of contract, not a cognizable offense.
All further proceedings against the petitioners in CC.2730/2014 are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA
TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 19TH POUSHA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 3550 of 2016
----------------------CC 2730/2014 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1, KOTTAYAM
----------
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED
BY ADV.SRI.M.J.THOMAS
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
1. P.K. SASI,
2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM 682 031
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.V.
Crl.MC.No. 3550 of 2016 ()
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
| A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC NO 2730/2014 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.1,KOTTAYAM |
|---|
| A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE OF THE SWORN STATEMENT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT |
| A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET IN CC NO 2730/2014 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS AMGISTRATE COURT NO 1,KOTTAYAM |
| A4 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 24/9/2012, THE 1ST PETITIONER AND SANTHOSH KUMAR |
| A5 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED 283/2010 OF PAMAPADY SRO |
| A6 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE BETWEEN THE 1ST PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT ON 1/2/2013 |
| A7 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO 1492/1/13 DATED 13/9/2013 OF SRO MEENADAM |
| RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL --------------------- |
K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
Crl.M.C. No.3550 of 2016
Dated this the 9th day of January, 2018
O R D E R
Petitioners are A1 and A2 in CC.2730/2014 of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kottayam, which has arisen from Annexure-1 private complaint. Cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 406, 418 and 420 read with Section 34 IPC.
Crl.M.C.3550/2016
: 2 :
suppressing the said fact, the complainant was induced to part with the amount. The 3rd accused in Annexure-1 is the prior title holder of the property, with whom the 1st petitioner had entered into an agreement for sale of the said property. It was based on that agreement, the 1st petitioner and the 3rd accused named in Annexure-1 had agreed to sell the property to the complainant.
Crl.M.C.3550/2016
: 3 :
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners in CC.2730/2014 of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kottayam, which has arisen from Annexure-1 private complaint Police Station, are quashed.
Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)
aks/09/01
// True Copy //
PS to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the allegations of cheating regarding property sale are justiciable civil disputes.
Whether proceedings under Sections 406, 418, 420 and 34 IPC are sustainable when the matter is only a breach of contract.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Santhosh Varghese
Leelamma Santhosh
P.K. Sasi
The State of Kerala
B.Kemal Pasha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
