Allowed

Sabarinathan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Nov 2020Crl.MC/259/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a criminal miscellaneous case, quashed the FIR and proceedings. The court held that a dispute over the agreed price for supplying lotus flowers is a civil matter and does not attract criminal liability under relevant IPC sections.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous case was allowed accordingly; the registration of the crime and the FIR was quashed.

Sabarinathan Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 19TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.259 OF 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 149/2011 DATED 01-11-2017 OF CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM

¶7

CRIME NO.3776/2010 OF Ernakulam Central Police Station , Ernakulam

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

SABARINATHAN

¶10

S/O. SUYAMBU, AGED 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT EAST CHIRAKIL VEEDU,PARAMMAL ROAD, NAGERCOIL VILLAGE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT,TAMILNADU - 629 001.

¶11

BY ADVS.

¶12

SRI.M.RAMASWAMY PILLAI SMT.PREETHY R. NAIR SRI.P.C.VIJAYAKUMAR SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN

¶13

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶15

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.

¶16

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM - 682 018.

¶17

3 E.V SURESH BABU S/O. VISWANATH SHENOY, AGED 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT SREENILAYAM HOUSE, KULATHERI KUTHYTHARA LINK ROAD, MARADU KARA, MARADU VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 304.

¶18

R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.E.C.BINEESH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.MC.No.259/2018 2

¶21

ORDER

¶22

An agreement to supply lotus flowers for an

¶23

agreed consideration was entered into between the accused and respondent No.3, the defacto complainant. Crime was registered under Section 406, 420 and 34

¶24

IPC on the allegation that what is agreed into by way of consideration is more than the prevailing rate of

¶25

lotus flowers. An agreement was entered into voluntarily by both the parties fixing the value of flower and agreed to supply the same on payment for ten days. Hence, the parties are bound by the terms and conditions. When there is consensus ad idem regarding the price to be paid by both the parties by way of an agreement, the same will not attract the

¶26

offence under Section 420 IPC. No criminal liability can be fastened. Hence registration of

¶27

crime and the FIR is an abuse of the process of court and hence it is hereby quashed.

¶28

Crl.M.C. is allowed accordingly.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

SPV

Crl.MC.No.259/2018 3

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶35

*ANNEXURE I THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE SAID FIR NO.3776 DATED 17-12-2010 OF ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE II THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE SAID CHARGE SHEET NO.1483/11 DATED 25-5-2011 BY WRITTEN AS WRONGLY 25-05-2010. * (CRIME NUMBER “1483/2011” OCCURING IN CRL.M.C AND PETITIONS IS CORRECTED SUBSTITUTED BY “3776/2010” AS PER ORDER DATED 09.02.2018 IN CRL.M.A.686/18) (THE CRIME REFERENCE “CHARGE SHEET NO.3776/10 DATED 25.05.2011” OCCURRED IN THE ANNEXURE II IS CORRECTED AND SUBSTITUTED AS “CHARGE SHEET NO.1483/2011 DATED 25.05.2010 AS PER ORDER DATED 24.09.2018 IN CRL.M.A.3/18) ANNEXURE III THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DISCHARGE PETITION - CMP NO.2676 OF 2017 IN C.C 149/2011. ANNEXURE IV THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1-112017 IN C.M.P NO.2676/2017 IN C.C. 149/2011 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM.

¶36

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶37

//TRUE COPY//

¶38

PA TO JUDGE

Sabarinathan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabarinathan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.K.v.Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Raveendran @ Moni Vs State of Kerala

Sudha Vs State of Kerala

Reji M.P. Vs State of Kerala

P M Manoj Vs State of Kerala

Ismail Vs State of Kerala