Dismissed

Prince v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Dec 2020Crl.MC/1921/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a Criminal Miscellaneous petition challenging the registration of an offence under IPC Sections 386, 306, and 34. The court held that assertions regarding lack of truth or bonafides are evidentiary matters and cannot form the basis for quashing an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. is dismissed without prejudice to the right of petitioners to raise defences and remedies at subsequent stages.

Prince Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.1921 OF 2019(A)

¶6

SC 64/2017 OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM

¶7

CRIME NO.210/2016 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos 1 & 2:

¶9

1 PRINCE, AGED 35 YEARS, S/o LUCOSE PANICKER,PRINCY BHAVANAM, NEAR KOTTOOR TEMBLE, PERUMPUZHA CHERRY, ELAMPALLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶10

2 LUCOSE PANICKER, AGED 70 YEARS, S/o KOSHI PANICKER, PRINCY BHAVANAM, NEAR KOTTOOR TEMBLE, PERUMPUZHA CHERRY, ELAMPALLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.C.RAJENDRAN

¶12

SRI.B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN

¶13

RESPONDENT/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶14

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

¶15

2 JAYACHANDRAN NAIR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/o THULASEEDHARAN NAIR, PRABHA NIVAS, VAIDYASALA JUNCTION, ELAMPALLOOR, KOLLAM, KERALA-691501.

¶16

R2 BY ADVS. SRI.R.MOHANA BABU

¶17

SRI.M.AJITH

¶18

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.N. MAYA

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.M.C.No.1921 of 2019

¶21

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The challenge in this case is against the

¶24

registration of crime for the offence punishable under Sections 386 and 306 r/w Section 34 IPC on the ground that there is no truth or bonafides in the allegation. After investigation final report was submitted by which the investigating officer has collected some writing as that of the victim written somewhere just before the commission of suicide. Statement of witness was taken. Then it is a matter of evidence. Hence the same cannot be used as a ground of attack under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C. is hence dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to raise all the defence and

¶25

remedies at the various stages of the proceedings.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

JUDGE

DMR/-

Crl.M.C.No.1921 of 2019

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

¶34

ANNEXURE A1	A CERTIFIED COPY	OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS
ANNEXURE A2	A CERTIFIED COPY 30.5.2016	OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
ANNEXURE A3	A TRUE COPY OF T MADHUSOODHANAN P	HE INQUEST OF ILLAI.
ANNEXURE A4	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY	OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED
ANNEXURE A5	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY CW11 PRASAD TO T	THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY HE POLICE
ANNEXURE A6	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY SANGEETHA TO THE	OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY POLICE
ANNEXURE A7	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY FURNISHED BY THE BSNL.	OF THE INFORMATION INFORMATION OFFICER OF
ANNEXURE A8	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY EXAMINATION BY F	OF THE RESULT OF ORENSIC SCIENE LABORAT0RY.
RESPONDENTS'	ANNEXURE: NIL

¶35

// TRUE COPY //

¶36

P.A. TO JUDGE

Prince v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prince 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

Rajeev K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Joykutty Jacob Vs the State of Kerala

Nazeema Beevi Vs State of Kerala

Thulasidharan Nair Vs Diamond Village Kuries

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Raj Kapoor Vs State of Kerala