The Kerala High Court quashed the FIR under Section 468 IPC, alleging fabrication of witness summons delivery. Finding the witness affidavit proved actual service, the court held proceeding further served no purpose; justice demanded quashing.
The Criminal Misc. Case and the attached FIR are allowed and 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 P.SOMARAJAN
TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 5TH KARTHIKA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.1932 OF 2019(B)
CRIME NO.1392/2018 OF THENMALA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SANTHOSH KUMAR.S., S/O. THE LATE R. SUKUMARA PILLAI, AGED 43 YEARS, CPO 6388, THENMALA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM RURAL, PIN:691 308 RESIDING AT LATHIKA VILASAM, THUDAYANNOOR P.O., KATTAMPALLY, KADAKKAL 691 536.
BY ADVS. SRI.S.ABHILASH SRI.K.SIJU
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THENMALAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM RURAL, KOLLAM 691 308.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.1932 OF 2019(B) 2
ORDER
Annexure-1, FIR sought to be quashed by the sole accused, CPO attached to a police station. The crime alleged is under Section 468 of IPC, on the reason that the summons issued to a witness was not served, but fabricated the same as if it was served to the witness. The affidavit sworn by the abovesaid witness produced to show that the summons in question was served to him and that it contains his signature. If that be so, no purpose will be served, if it is proceeded further. For securing ends of justice it is fit and proper to quash the same. I do so, by allowing the Crl.M.C.
Crl.M.C. is allowed accordingly.
Sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN
JUDGE
msp
Crl.MC.No.1932 OF 2019(B) 3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1392/2018 OF THENMALA POLICE STATION AND DOCUMENTS.
ANNEXURE 2 THE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 30.9.2018.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the First Information Report (FIR) alleging criminal breach of trust/forgery regarding a witness summons should be quashed in the public interest.
Whether the evidence in the affidavit filed by the witness suggests fabrication of service of summons making further proceedings futile.
SANTHOSH KUMAR.S.
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
P.SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
