Dismissed

Sree Renjini @ Rejani v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Oct 2020Crl.MC/6261/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected an application to quash a criminal complaint alleging offences under Sections 420 and 506 IPC. The Court held that at the stage of cognizance under Section 202 Cr.P.C., the accused has no right of hearing, and allegations of the case being false or civil in nature are insufficient grounds for quashing proceedings under Article 226/Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash the complaint under Sections 420 and 506 IPC is dismissed.

Sree Renjini @ Rejani Vs the State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

Crl.M.C.No.6261 of 2016

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 24TH ASWINA, 1942

¶7

Crl.MC.No.6261 OF 2016

¶8

IN CC No.528/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

¶9

SOURTH PARAVUR, KOLLAM

¶10

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶11

SREE RENJINI @ REJANI, AGED 42 YEARS, D/o SREEDHARAN PILLAI, CHAKKANTAZHIKATHU VEETTIL, KOTTAPPURAM VILLAGE, PARAVUR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT DEEPAM HOUSE, MEENAD VILLAGE, CHATHANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.T.MADHU

¶13

SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI

¶14

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶15

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

¶16

2 LATHIKA BAI, AGED 44 YEARS, D/o THULASI BAI, KUNNIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., ELAMKULAM, MEVANAKONATH CHERRY, PARIPPALLY, KOLLAM, NOW RESIDING AT RENJITH BHAVAN, PAMPURAM, ELAMKULAM, MEVANAKKONATH CHERRY, KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 578

¶17

3 R. RAJEEV KUMAR @ RAJEEV RANGAN, AMBIKALAYAM PLOT NO.39, P.T.P.NAGAR P.O., VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 013.

¶18

R2 BY ADV. SMT.M.P.NEETHU BY ADV. SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. E.C.BINEESH

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.10.2020. THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.6261 of 2016

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The complaint alleging offence under Sections 420, 506(ii) r/w Section 34 IPC is sought to be quashed. Cognizance was taken under Section 202 Cr.P.C. It is at this stage, the accused No.1 came up to quash the complaint.

¶24

At the stage of taking cognizance, the accused has no

¶25

role to play and he cannot even participate in the proceedings. He will not get any right of hearing. This would show that, at the instance of accused, cognizance taken under Section 202 Cr.P.C. cannot be defeated, but the canvass under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is wide enough and not restricted on account of existence or non-existence of right of hearing or right of interference. When the proceeding would result in abuse of the process of court or in order to secure ends of justice, interference is warranted under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the same cannot be defeated on account of existence or non-

¶26

existence of right of hearing or right of interference available to the accused with respect to a particular stage of proceeding namely, cognizance taken under Section 202 Cr.P.C.. But the allegation in the complaint is with respect

¶27

to the offence under Sections 420 and 506(ii) r/w Section 34

¶28

IPC over which cognizance was taken. At this stage, it

¶29

cannot be ascertained whether it is a false case or not and

¶30

Crl.M.C.No.6261 of 2016 3 whether it is perfectly a civil dispute. Hence the same cannot be a reason to quash the proceedings.

¶31

Crl.M.C. is dismissed.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

DMR/- JUDGE

Crl.M.C.No.6261 of 2016

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE:

¶39

ANNEXURE-A1 THE TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PRIVATE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT IN CC NO.528/2015 ON THE FILES OF THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT, SOUTH PARAVUR.

¶40

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE: NIL

¶41

// TRUE COPY //

¶42

P.A. TO JUDGE

Sree Renjini @ Rejani v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Renjini @ Rejani v. the 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

Sailan a.K., Vs the State of Kerala

Sailan, Vs the State of Kerala

Sailan A.K. Vs the State of Kerala

A.v.John Vs Asharaf @ Raveendran

Xavier N.Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Varun, Vs State of Kerala