Allowed

S.Sekhar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Mar 2019Crl.MC/5461/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of a final police report. The court held that prosecution for falsely declaring evidence Bharosa under Section 193 IPC requires a complaint by the concerned court under Section 195(1)(b)(i) Cr.P.C., which was absent here.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of Annexure A3 final report and the subsequent criminal proceedings in C.C.No.480/2015.

S.Sekhar Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 5461 of 2015

¶6

C.C.NO.480/2015 of TEMPORARY JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM

¶7

CRIME NO.945/2014 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

S.SEKHAR, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O.SUNDARESAN SABARI, SANTHI NAGAR - 39, CANTONMENT NORTH, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM

¶10

BY ADVS.

¶11

SRI.K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S

¶12

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031

¶14

2 NIRMALA,

¶15

AGED 50 YEARS, W/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, CHIPPIYIL VEEDU, SREERANGAM LANE, THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM - 686004

¶16

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B.JAYASURYA R2 BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Crl.MC.No. 5461 of 2015 : 2 :

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The sole accused in C.C.No.480/2015 on the files of the Temporary Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kollam seeks to quash Annexure A3 final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Kollam West invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶22

Annexure A3 discloses that the petitioner was sought

¶23

to be prosecuted for offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC.

¶24

I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well

¶25

as the 2^nd respondent, the de facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶26

The essence of the prosecution case is that the petitioner filed a false affidavit in O.S.No.393/2012 on the files of Principal Munsiff Court, Kollam and obtained an order of interim injunction in I.A.No.2080/2012 on the basis of false averments sworn to by him. Alleging that the petitioner committed an offence under Section 193 IPC, Annexure A1

¶27

Crl.MC.No. 5461 of 2015 : 3 :

¶28

private complaint was submitted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kollam and the same was forwarded for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and later, Annexure A3 final report was filed after completing investigation for offence punishable under Section 193 IPC.

¶29

The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is legal bar placed by Section 195(1) (b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure debarring prosecution of offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC otherwise than through a complaint lodged by the concerned court. Under Section 195(1)(b)(i) Cr.P.C., no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 193 except upon a complaint in writing by the court concerned or any such other officer as the court may authorize. In this case, the complaint launched is not at the instance of the court at all nor any authorised officer. On this short grounds itself, prosecution falls to ground by virtue of the bar arising under Section 195(1)(b)(i) applies to the present case. When this legal position was argued, the learned Public Prosecutor also conceded the position. In view of the legal bar operating in this case, not

¶30

Crl.MC.No. 5461 of 2015 : 4 :

¶31

much discussion of facts seems to be further necessary. Thus, in the light of the legal bar arising under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, I hold that Annexure A3 final report can no longer sustain and it is liable to be quashed.

¶32

In the result, Crl.M.C.No.5461/2015 is allowed, quashing Annexure A3 final report as well as the consequential proceeding in C.C.No.480/2015 on the files of the Temporary Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kollam as being hit by the legal bar flowing from Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE

¶35

¶36

Crl.MC.No. 5461 of 2015 : 5 :

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.945/2014 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AS CRIME NO.721/2011 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.480/2015 BEFORE THE TEMPORARY JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM ANNEXURE A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.09.2013 IN O.S.NO.393/2012 BY THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM

¶40

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//True Copy//

P.A. To Judge

S.Sekhar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sekhar 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

Gopakumar Vs Maya. K.G

Ani Vs State of Kerala

Senmon P.V Vs Showniya P.T

Aparna Vs Kannan @ Vishnu

Rajeev Kumar Vs K.R.Vijayakumari Ammal

Rajeev Vs State of Kerala