Single judge dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR and proceedings. The Court noted final reports were filed, directing the petitioner to seek remedies before the jurisdictional court, reserving liberty to raise further objections.
Petition dismissed; petitioner to work out remedies before jurisdictional court.
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 V.G.ARUN
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.4534 OF 2020(F)
CRIME NO.1023/2020 OF Ottapalam Police Station , Palakkad
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
PRANAV
AGED 26 YEARS S/O. PRABHAKARAN, THALAPPOLI PALLIYALIL HOUSE, PANAMANNA, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031
2 NARAYANAN KUTTY, AGED 50 YEARS S/O. KORAN, KARUVATHUMPARA, CHEMMANKODE COLONY, PANAMANNA P.O, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 679 501
OTHER PRESENT:
PP SREEJA V
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.4534 OF 2020(F) ..2..
ORDER
Dated this the 15th day of December 2020
The prayer in this Criminal M.C.is to quash the FIR and further proceedings in Crime No.1023/2020 registered at the Ottapalam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 506 and 325 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The challenge is on the ground that allegation are false and the de facto complainant is the aggressor. The incident is the off shoot of a dispute regarding lopping of branches of the trees standing on the boundary of the property of the petitioner and the de facto complainant. At the instance of the petitioner, Crime No.1024/2020 has been registered against the 2nd respondent/de facto
Crl.MC.No.4534 OF 2020(F) ..3..
complainant.
The Criminal M.C.is hence dismissed, reserving the petitioner's liberty to raise to avail the remedies available to him before the jurisdictional court.
Sd/V.G.ARUN SB/15/12/2020 JUDGE
Crl.MC.No.4534 OF 2020(F) ..4..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT AND FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1023/2020 OF OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT AND FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1024/2020 OF OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION
//true copy// P.A to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition for quashing the FIR and further proceedings should be allowed given the alternate FIR against the complainant.
Whether the petitioner can avail remedies before the jurisdictional court instead of quashing the proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pranav
State of Kerala
Narayan Kutty
V.G.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
