Dismissed

Bindu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Oct 2019Crl.MC/4254/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings alleging cheating and forgery. The court found sufficient materials to prove charges of creating false salary certificates to obtain bank loans, concluding the case was ripe for trial.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings was dismissed, upholding the case for trial.

Bindu Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 2ND KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.4254 OF 2017

¶6

AGAINST CC 466/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -V,KOZHIKODE

¶7

CRIME NO.391/2008 OF Kasaba Police Station , Kozhikode

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1,4,7,9,14,15,16 & 17:

¶9

1 BINDU

¶10

W/O.DAMODARAN, AGED 40 YEARS, CHEPPRATHARAMMAL HOUSE, NOCHADU,PANOLI (PO), PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 525

¶11

2 M.L LINEESH S/O. KANARAN, AGED 38 YEARS, THEKKE AMMATH HOUSE,MEPPAYOOR (PO),PERAMBRA,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 524

¶12

3 P.K VINOD KUMAR S/O. MADHAVAN, AGED 44 YEARS, PINAVALIL KUNI HOUSE, ELATHOOT (PO),VENGALAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶13

4 P.K PREMAN S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, AGED 46 YEARS,KALAMOLI HOUSE, PAVANGADU, PUTHIYANGADI (PO),KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 021

¶14

5 M.K VINOD S/O. SUKUMARAN, AGED 48 YEARS,MELEKUPPALI HOUSE, (P.O) ELATHOOR,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶15

6 V. NARAYANI W/O. KUMARAN, AGED 57 YEARS,VAZHATTU HOUSE, KUNDUTHODU (PO),BLUE MOUNT, KUTTIADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 513

¶16

Crl.M.C.No.4254/2017

¶17

¶18

7 P.M SHAJI D/O. GOPALAN, AGED 36 YEARS,PUTHIYOTTIL MEETHAL HOUSE,THODANNOOR (PO),VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶19

8 M.T ASHOKAN S/O. UNNIKRISHNA KURUP,AGED 58 YEARS,SANDRIMA, PUTHAN PURAYIL HOUSE,MENJANNUYAM (PO)PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 525

¶20

BY ADVS.

¶21

SRI.P.R.SREEJITH SMT.MAYA CHANDRAN SRI.M.PROMODH KUMAR SRI.K.B.SAJEESH

¶22

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶23

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM 682 031

¶24

2 BANK OF BARODA

¶25

A BODY CORPORATE,HEAD OFFICE BARODA, REPRESENTED BY BRANCH MANAGER,MAVOOR ROAD, KOZHIKODE 673 004

¶26

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.ANEESH R1 BY ADV. SRI.ADARSH KUMAR R1 BY ADV. SRI.BIJU VARGHESE ABRAHAM R1 BY ADV. SRI.DILEEP CHANDRAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.SANTHOSH KUMAR KALIYANAM

¶27

SMT M K PUSHPALATHA -PP

¶28

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.10.2019, THE COURT ON 24.10.2019 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.4254/2017

¶30

¶31

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, J

¶32

************************ Crl.M.C.No.4254 of 2017

¶33

Dated this the 24^th day of October, 2019

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing

¶36

the proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C.No.466/2015 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode, which is based on the final report filed in Crime No.391/2008 of the Kasaba police station, Kozhikode.

¶37

The petitioners are accused 1, 4, 7, 9, 14, 15, 16 and 17 in the aforesaid case. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 406, 420, 463 and 468 I.P.C.

¶38

The prosecution case is that the accused were employees of the company by name 'Kerala Housing Finance Limited' and that they created false salary certificates showing inflated amount as salary and produced them in the Bank of

¶39

¶40

Crl.M.C.No.4254/2017

¶41

Baroda and using such false documents, they obtained a total amount of Rs.25,00,000/- as loan from the bank.

¶42

Heard. Perused the records produced.

¶43

After completing the investigation, chargesheet has

¶44

been filed in the case against 21 persons, including the petitioners, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 463 and 468 I.P.C. On a perusal of Annexure-1 chargesheet and the statements of witnesses, it can be found that, prima facie, there are sufficient materials produced by the prosecution to prove the offences alleged against the accused.

¶45

There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioners had availed loan from the bank by producing the salary certificates. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the bank had forwarded the salary certificates produced by the petitioners to the company in which they were working and got the salary certificates verified from the company and it was only after adopting such procedure, the bank had granted loan to the petitioners. But, it is to be noted that, it is a case where there is allegation that the accused,

¶46

¶47

Crl.M.C.No.4254/2017

¶48

who were employees of a company, have acted together to cheat the bank. The officers of the company, who have allegedly verified the salary certificates which were forwarded from the bank, are also accused in the case.

¶49

It is submitted that the trial court has already framed charge against the petitioners and the other accused and that the case is ripe for trial. The petitioners could raise all their contentions during the trial of the case.

¶50

In the aforesaid circumstances, I find no sufficient

¶51

ground to quash the proceedings against the petitioners by invoking the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶52

Consequently, the petition is dismissed.

¶53

(sd/-)

¶54

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE

jsr

Crl.M.C.No.4254/2017

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶60

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR DATED 11-072008 AND THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 391/2008 OF KASABA POLICE KOZHIKODE

¶61

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

¶62

NIL

¶63

TRUE COPY

¶64

PS TO JUDGE

Bindu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bindu 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

Sreekanth Vs State of Kerala

Ashique Rahman @ Babu, Vs the State of Kerala

Annie Joy Vs State of Kerala

The Manager, Vs the State of Kerala

The Divisional Chief Executive Vs the State of Kerala

Sindhu S.Panicker Vs a.Balakrishnan