Dismissed

Jayanthi Krishnan, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Oct 2020Crl.MC/9280/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused to apply Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR alleging cheating despite allegations of counterblast. Instead, it directed the investigation officer to conduct a proper investigation considering ill-motive within three months and dismissed the Miscellaneous Case.

What did the court decide?

Direction to investigate the complaints and complete the investigation within three months considering ill-motive; Crl.M.C. dismissed.

Jayanthi Krishnan, Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 17TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.9280 OF 2019(H)

¶6

CRIME NO.1116/2018 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶8

JAYANTHI KRISHNAN, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.MANI V.K., AISWARYA, VELIYANOOR, THRISSUR- 680563.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.P.SANJAY SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED ASLAM SRI.KIRAN NARAYANAN SRI.PAUL VARGHESE (PALLATH)

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SI OF POLICE, OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN- 682031.

¶12

2 EBIN R., HEAD, MARKETING, KERALA SIDCO LIMITED, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, CANTONMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY, PIN- 695019.

¶13

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.SRI.RAMESH CHAND

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No.9280 OF 2019(H) 2

¶16

ORDER

¶17

To quash the FIR registered on the allegation of offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, the accused came up alleging that four consecutive FIR were registered against her as a counter blast and with an intention to wreck vengeance against her on the reason that she had earlier lodged a complaint against the Managing Director of SIDCO alleging harassment. Prima facie, it appears that there is something fishy in the registration of four crimes consecutively on the allegation of

¶18

issuance of advanced stamp receipt. Since it requires adjudication by evidence, it is not proper to exercise inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. But there will be a direction to the investigation officer to conduct a proper investigation and to take into consideration

¶19

Crl.MC.No.9280 OF 2019(H) 3

¶20

any ill-motive in initiating criminal

¶21

prosecution against the accused. There will be a further direction to complete the investigation without any further delay, positively within a time schedule of three months.

¶22

Crl.M.C. is dismissed, with the above said

¶23

directions.

¶24

Sd/P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

¶25

msp

¶26

Crl.MC.No.9280 OF 2019(H) 4

¶27

APPENDIX

¶28

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶29

ANNEXURE A1	TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 28.07.2018 MADE BY PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE A2	TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 28.07.2018 REGISTERED AS CRIME NO.0839/2018 OF PALAKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A3	TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.0642/2018 AT CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A4	TRUE COPY OF THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 10.12.2018.
ANNEXURE A5	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.01.2019 IN W.P(C)NO.41761/2018.
ANNEXURE A6	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.09.2019 FROM ENQUIRY OFFICER INTIMATING HEARING.
ANNEXURE A7	CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED AS CRIME NO.1116 OF 2018 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A8	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.12.2018 MADE BY THE SUPPLIER.
ANNEXURE A9	TRUE COPY OF THE WRIT PETITION (WP NO.32258/2019) FILED BY THE SUPPLIER.
ANNEXURE A10	TRUE COPIES OF OLD STAMPED RECEIPTS ISSUED BY OTHER EMPLOYEES IN SIDCO EARLIER.
RESPONDENTS EXHIB	ITS:NIL

¶30

//TRUE COPY//

¶31

P.A. TO JUDGE

Jayanthi Krishnan, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanthi Krishnan, 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

Salim Abdulla Vs State of Kerala

Francis.T.Chacko Vs State of Kerala

Noorudheenkutty Vs State of Kerala

Sadanandan Thundil Krishnan Vs the State Police Chief

Salim @ Salim India Vs State of Kerala

Anantharaj Vs State of Kerala