Quashed

Mohandas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Oct 2019Crl.MC/5632/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings initiated based on a final report that failed to disclose the commission of the alleged offence, ruling such continuation as abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings in C.C No. 1047/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Neyyattinkara, based on the Annexure-A1 final report, are hereby quashed.

Mohandas Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2019) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 30TH ASWINA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.5632 OF 2017

¶6

CC NO. 1047/2014 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III,NEYYATTINKARA

¶7

CRIME NO.377/2014 OF Kovalam Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 1 AND 2:

¶9

1 MOHANDAS

¶10

AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. SATHYADAS, MANCHAVILAKOM, MEKKOLLAM, KOPRA, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶11

2 ABDUL RAHIM AGED 49 YEARS, ESUKUNJU,AFNA MANZIL, VARUVILA, PULIYOORKONAM,VIZHINJAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.M.M.HUSAIN SRI.M.ASIF SRI.K.A.MANZOOR ALI

¶13

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶14

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

¶15

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOVALAM POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 527

¶16

SMT M K PUSHPALATHA-PP

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-10-2019, THE COURT ON 22-10-2019 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Crl.MC.No.5632 OF 2017

¶19

¶20

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J

¶21

Crl.M.C No.5632 of 2017

¶22

Dated this the 22^nd day of October, 2019

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This is an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing the proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C No.1047/2014 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Neyyattinkara, which is based on Annexure-A1 final report filed in Crime No.377/2014 of Kovalam Police Station.

¶25

The petitioners are the first and the second accused in the case. The allegation against them is that they have committed an offence punishable under Section 3 read with 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

¶26

The prosecution case is that on 24.03.2014, at about 16:00 hours, the first accused was found transporting 263 bags of rice in the lorry owned by the second accused, without any bill or documents relating to the rice. The lorry was intercepted by the Special Tahsildar attached to the Election Flying Squad. He entrusted the lorry and the rice to the Sub Inspector of Kovalam Police Station, who in turn

¶27

Crl.MC.No.5632 OF 2017

¶28

¶29

registered Crime No. 377/2014 in the matter. After completing the investigation, he filed Annexure-A1 charge sheet against the petitioners in the competent court.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶31

Annexure-A2 order passed by the District Collector shows that the rice transported by the first accused was not ration rice. The only illegality in transporting the rice was that no bill or other document relating to the rice was kept in the lorry or with the driver. On inspection of the bills and the other documents subsequently produced before the District Collector, he had found that the rice was not illegally transported. The District Collector, as per Annexure-A2 order, imposed a fine of Rs.5,000/- on the second accused for not keeping the bill for the rice at the time of transporting. These facts are not disputed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶32

The offence under Section 3 read with 7 of the Act is alleged against the petitioners in the case. Section 7 of the Act prescribes the punishment for contravention of any order made under Section 3 of the Act. Annexure-A1 charge sheet does not disclose what order made under Section 3 of the Act was contravened by the petitioners/accused. The allegation against the petitioners in the final

¶33

Crl.MC.No.5632 OF 2017

¶34

¶35

report does not disclose the commission of any offence punishable under Section 3 read with 7 of the Act.

¶36

In the aforesaid circumstances, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners in the case, based on Annexure-A1 final report, would be an abuse of process of the court. Therefore, the proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶37

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C No.1047/2014 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Neyyattinkara, based on Annexure-A1 final report filed in Crime No.377/2014 of Kovalam Police Station, are hereby quashed.

¶38

Sd/-R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

lsn

¶41

Crl.MC.No.5632 OF 2017

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX

¶44

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶45

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AS CR.NO 377/2014 OF KOVALAM POLICE STATION DATED 31/3/2014 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III,NEYYATTINKARA ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DATED 27/3/2014 ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN TO THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, NEYYATTINKARA ANNEXURE A4 CHALLAN DATED 27-03-2014 SHOWING THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE 2ND PETITIONER PURSUANT TO ANNEXURE A3

¶46

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶47

TRUE COPY

¶48

P.A TO JUDGE

¶49

LSN

Mohandas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohandas 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

Nazeer Vs State

Krishnakumar Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Sahid Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Nizaruddin Vs Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Sreekantan, Vs Valsala

Saju Vs State of Kerala