Petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings alleging criminal breach of trust. Court refused to quash at nascent stage, holding investigation must continue. Petitioner ordered to cooperate with Investigating Officer.
Petitioner directed to cooperate with investigation and appear before Investigating Officer.
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 K.HARIPAL
SATURDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
CRL.MC NO. 5011 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 519/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, PEERUMEDU
PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED:
C.R.SABU
AGED 50 YEARS
CHERIPURATH HOUSE, KORUTHODU P.O, MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 513
BY ADV N.J.MATHEWS
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT :
PERUVAMTHANAM POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 532
THUMBATTU HOUSE, KARUTHODU P.O, MUNDAKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 513
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP - SMT. M.K.PUSHPALATHA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2
Crl. M.C. No.5011 of 2021
ORDER
Petitioner is the 1 st accused in Crime No. 126 of 2021 of Peruvamthanam police station which was registered on the strength of the complaint preferred by the 2 nd respondent alleging offfence punishable under Section 406 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Petitioner is the 1 st accused in the complaint.
2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
3. In the nature of the order that is proposed to be passed, it does not seem that notice be issued to the 2 nd respondent. The petitioner is an LIC agent, that through him the 2 nd respondent had subscribed three policies and it is the case of the complainant, the 2 nd respondent that he had made remittances to wards the policies through the 1 st respondent. On a few occasions, the petitioner had given only temporary receipts which were ultimately found to be fake; the petitioner had made him believe that he will be given original receipts thereafter. He also resisted the complainant making direct enquiries in the LIC office. Thus it is
3
Crl. M.C. No.5011 of 2021
alleged that he had committed criminal breach of trust; the crime was registered on that basis and now investigation is going on.
4. Petitioner wants to quash the proceedings. According to him the documents allegedly issued by the petitioner has not been produced, and none of the officials of the LIC has been cited as witness and therefore this is clearly an abuse of the process of Court.
5. After having heard counsel on both sides, I am not convinced that at this nascent stage it could be branded as a clear abuse of process of the Court. Even though documents were not produced or officials were not cited, it is in the domain of investigation; now the police have taken over investigation, and real facts will come out through investigation. At this stage, it is too early for this Court to form an opinion to say that it is a clear abuse of the process of law. It is a matter of investigation and investigation should continue. Therefore, the question of quashing Annexure- A1, and A2 are far fetched.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel submits that he is prepared to co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the
4
Crl. M.C. No.5011 of 2021
Investigating Officer. In the nature of the allegations, it seems that the petitioner should co-operates with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer.
Recording the same, the Criminal Miscellaneous Case is closed.
Sd/K. HARIPAL
JUDGE
RMV/04/12/21
5011 of 2021
5
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5011/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURE Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R NO. 126/2021 REGISTERED AT PERUVAMTHANAM POLICE STATION OF IDUKKI DISTRICT. Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT NUMBERED AS CRL.M.P NO. 519/2021 OF JFMC-II, PEERUMEDU FILED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.
TRUE COPY
P.A.TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated in the FIR would abuse the process of the court.
Whether the petitioner should cooperate with the ongoing police investigation.
C. Rabu
State
Divakaran P.T
K. Haripal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
