Quashed

K.Venugopalan. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Dec 2020Crl.MC/3620/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court quashed a criminal case under Sections 406 and 409 IPC registered against a temple executive officer for alleged misappropriation of deity gold ornaments. The court held that the case was registered without basis after a report verified the ornaments' quantity and quality prior to their handover.

What did the court decide?

The criminal case registered under Section 406 and 409 IPC is quashed as it was filed without satisfying the ingredients of the offence.

K.Venugopalan. Vs State of Kerala — Corruption | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.3620 OF 2020(B)

¶6

CRIME NO.567/2020 OF MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:

¶8

K.VENUGOPALAN,S/O. GOPALAN NAIR, AGED 54 YEARS, KANJIRI HOUSE, P.O. KURUMBATHUR, THIRUNAVAYA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SREE APATHUKATHA MAHAGANAPATHY TEMPLE, PATHUKUDI, MANNARKKAD, 678 582.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI 682 031,

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT- 678 582.

¶13

3 SETHURAMAN, AGED 53 YEARS S/O. PAZHANI SWAMY, PATHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, TIPPUSULATHAN ROAD, PARAPPURAM, MANNARKKAD P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 582.

¶14

R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.SABU GEORGE R3 BY ADV. SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER

¶15

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.N.MAYA

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.MC.No.3620 OF 2020(B) 2

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The gold ornaments belonged to a deity taken from a bank locker by the executive officer of the temple managed by Malabar Devaswom Board in connection with the festival were not returned after its culmination is the allegation levelled against the executive officer. A crime was registered for the offence under Section 406 and 409 IPC at the instance of the defacto complainant, one of the trustees of the temple, against the executive officer. In fact, gold ornaments were kept in the locker attached to the temple instead of keeping the same in the bank locker. A report was prepared by officers of Malabar Devaswom (Annexure G) in that regard after verifying the quality, nature and quantity of the gold ornaments. This would

¶20

Crl.MC.No.3620 OF 2020(B) 3

¶21

show what is behind it. A crime caused to be

¶22

registered at the instance of the defacto complainant without any basis against the executive officer of the temple. Hence the crime registered without satisfying the ingredients which would constitute the offence under Section 406 and 409 IPC is liable to be quashed. I do so.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

JUDGE

msp

Crl.MC.No.3620 OF 2020(B) 4

¶28

APPENDIX

¶29

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶30

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.06.2019 IN M.P. NO. 1/2018 OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE.

¶31

ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE KACHEET EXECUTED BY THE FIT PERSON ON 31.10.2019. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 04.11.2019 GIVEN BY THE FIT PERSON.

¶32

ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF KACHEET GIVEN BY THE FIT PERSON, ACCEPTING THE GOLD ORNAMENTS AND WHICH WAS ENDORSED BY THE MELSATHY. ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE COMPLAINANT. ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE RULE PERTAINING TO THE CUSTODY OF JEWELS AND OTHER VALUABLES.

¶33

ANNEXURE G TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. A3.1182/2020/MDB DATED 23.07.2020 OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, PALAKKAD ADDRESSED T THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶34

ANNEXURE H TRUE COPY OF WPC NO. 14138 OF 2020 WITHOUT EXHIBITS.

¶35

ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.07.2020 IN WPC NO. 14138 OF 2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶36

//TRUE COPY//

¶37

P.A. TO JUDGE

K.Venugopalan. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Venugopalan. 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

John Joseph Vs K.v.Surendran

Nissar Noorudheen Vs State of Kerala

E P Norbert Dilip Vs State of Kerala

Nazeema Beevi Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Joykutty Jacob Vs the State of Kerala