Dismissed

Amal v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Jul 2021Crl.MC/1997/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of FIR and final report in an abkari offence, the Court observed that Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not permit sitting in appeal to usurp trial court powers. The petition was dismissed without prejudice to parties' right to further agitate issues at the proper stage.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. Trial court instruction made to not insist personal appearance till framing of charge.

Amal Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF JULY 2021 / 10TH ASHADHA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1997 OF 2020

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 1919/2018 OF JUDICIAL

¶7

FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 AMAL, AGED 31 YEARS S/O.SAJEEV, THETTIKKOTT HOUSE, NELLIMATTAM DESAM, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT686693.

¶10

2 SANEESH, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.SREEDHARAN, THEEPPUZHAKUNNU HOUSE, MOONNUKADAVU DESAM, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686693.

¶11

3 ELDHO K.THOMAS, AGED 64 YEARS S/O.THOMAS, KAVUNGUMPILLIL, CHELAD P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 692.

¶12

4 C.A.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 69 YEARS S/O.AYYAPPAN, CHELAMOOTTIL HOUSE, THRIKKARIYOOR DESOM, THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 692.

¶13

5 VARGHESE, AGED 66 YEARS S/O.JOSEPH, KUNNATHU HOUSE, CHELAD, PINDIMANA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 692.

¶14

6 CHAMDRABOSE, AGED 59 YEARS

¶15

S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, MOOTHANGASSERRY HOUSE, THRIKKARIYOOR, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686692.

¶16

7 USHA SASI, AGED 59 YEARS W/O.SASI, KOOVAPPADAM, IMURY, VENGOOR WEST, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686691.

¶17

8 K.P.BIJU, AGED 41 YEARS S/O.PAULOSE, KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE, KUTHUKUZHI, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686691.

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 1997 OF 2020

¶19

¶20

9 P.V.NARAYANAN, AGED 55 YEARS S/O.VELAYUDHANAN, PULINTHANATHU, THRIKKALATHOOR DESOM, MULAVOOR, ALATHUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 673. BY ADVS. ALEXANDER JOSEPH SMT.AKHILASREE BHASKARAN

¶21

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶22

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

¶23

2 EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 541.

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

¶26

CRL.MC NO. 1997 OF 2020

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the

¶29

petitioners and the learned public prosecutor.

¶30

This is an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the FIR and final report submitted alleging commission of Abkari offence.

¶31

It was submitted by the learned

¶32

counsel that under Annexure-A3 order a finding

¶33

was rendered that no measurement was taken

¶34

as far as the toddy alleged to have been transported from Chittur. It was, inter alia, contended that several other reasons are there in favour of the petitioners. This Court under

¶35

Section 482 of Cr.P.C., cannot sit in appeal or revision and cannot even usurp the powers of the trial court. When there is remedy available to the parties, it is not at all fit and proper to

¶36

CRL.MC NO. 1997 OF 2020

¶37

¶38

exhaust the remedy under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Without prejudice to the right of the

¶39

parties to agitate all these issues at the proper stage of the proceedings, this Crl.M.C., is hereby dismissed.

¶40

It is made clear that the trial court shall not insist personal appearance of the parties till framing of the charge and the hearing thereof.

¶41

P. SOMARAJAN, JUDGE

¶42

AMV/01/07/2021

¶43

CRL.MC NO. 1997 OF 2020

¶44

¶45

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1997/2020

¶46

PETITION	ER ANNE	XURE
ANNEXURE	A1	TRUE	COPY OF	THE CRIME AND OFFENCE
		REPOR THE E	T NO.51/2 XCISE RAN	016 DATED 27.04.2016 OF GE OFFICE, ALATHUR.
ANNEXURE	A2	TRUE	COPY O	F THE JUDGMENT DATED
		12.08 HONOU	.2016 IN RABLE COU	W.A.NO.1527/2016 OF THIS RT.
ANNEXURE	A3	TRUE	COPY OF	THE ORDER NO.54/APL/2016
		DATED EXCIS THIRU	16.08.2 E VANANTHAP	016N OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, URAM.
ANNEXURE	A4	TRUE	COPY O	F THE JUDGMENT DATED
		16.12 THIS	.2016 IN HON'BLE C	W.P.(C)NO.39533/2016 OF OURT.
ANNEXURE	A5	TRUE	CERTIFIED	COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
		DATED THE COURT	30.04.20 JUDICIAL , ALATHUR	17 IN CRIME NO.51/2016 OF FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE .

¶47

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES : NIL

¶48

TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE

Amal v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amal 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

Aneesh, Vs State of Kerala

Mohamed Rashid M.P. Vs Fathima K.

Binu Raj Vs State of Kerala

Harrish Vs Aabida

Vishnu M.P., Vs State of Kerala

Shereef N Vs State of Kerala