Allowed

Sasidharan K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Mar 2021Crl.MC/6589/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two retired bank employees filed appeals against the conviction order in a criminal case alleging cheating and criminal breach of trust. The High Court quashed the proceedings, holding that the complainant could not sue for breach of trust as the successful bidder's husband, and the remedy for property extent reduction is civil, not criminal.

What did the court decide?

The FIR, final report and further proceedings in the quashed order are quashed.

Sasidharan K. Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

¶5

Crl.MC.No.6589 OF 2015(A)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 729/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER/2nd ACCUSED:

¶8

SASIDHARAN K., AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.LATE C.GOVINDA KURUP,FLAT NO.1C,SREE PADMAM APARTMENTS-II,MARAT LANE,M.G.ROAD,THRISSUR-68001.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.K.N.SIVASANKARAN SMT.ARCHANA S. KUMAR SRI.SUNIL SHANKER

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN CIRCLE,KOZHIKODE CITY,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.

¶12

*2 FRANCIS.M.D (CORRECTED) S/O.THOMAS,DONAM DEL,NELLIKKODE HOUSING COLONY,P.O.CHEVAYOOR,KOZHIKODE-673017.

¶13

*THE NAME OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT 'FRANCIS M.D.' OCCURRING IN THE CAUSE TITLE OF THE CRL.M.C.6589/15 IS CORRECTED AND SUBSTITUTED AS 'FRANCIS M.T.' AS PER ORDER DT.06/01/2016 IN CRL.M.A.120/2016 IN CRL.M.C.6589/15

¶14

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.E.C.BINEESH

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.03.2021, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.838/2017(D), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.MC.6589/2015, Crl.MC.838/2017 2

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶18

PRESENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶20

MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943

¶21

Crl.MC.No.838 OF 2017

¶22

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 729/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOZHIKODE

¶23

PETITIONER:

¶24

K.CHANDRAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.P VELAYUDHAN, 7/3, NEW STREET, KONGUNAGAR, RAMANATHAPURAM, COIMBATORE-641045.

¶25

BY ADVS.

¶26

SRI.K.N.SIVASANKARAN

¶27

SRI.SUNIL SHANKER

¶28

RESPONDENTS:

¶29

1 STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE CITY, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶30

2 FRANCIS M.T, S/O.THOMAS, DONAM DEL, NELLIKKODE HOUSING COLONY, P.O CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE 673017.

¶31

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAMESH CHAND

¶32

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.03.2021, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.6589/2015(A), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

Crl.MC.6589/2015, Crl.MC.838/2017 3

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The accused Nos.1 and 2 came up to quash the

¶36

FIR and the final report submitted on the allegation of offence under Sec. 406 and 420 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC and its further proceedings. Both

¶37

of them are Bank employees and now retired from the service. While they were holding the respective offices of the Bank, they sold 54 cents of property by initiating 'SARFAESI' proceedings and the wife of defacto complainant is the successful bidder. Later on it was found that there is reduction in extent and that earlier some portion was sold by

¶38

its owner. The successful bidder is the wife of

¶39

the defacto complainant and she never came up with any allegation for the offence under Sec. 406 and 420 IPC. An action under Sec.406 IPC can be

¶40

maintained only by the owner of the property in respect of which breach of trust has been committed

¶41

and in so far as Sec.420 IPC is concerned, it can

¶42

be by the person cheated. Hence, the husband

¶43

Crl.MC.6589/2015, Crl.MC.838/2017 4

¶44

cannot maintain an action either under Sec.406 or 420 IPC. Further, it will not disclose any offence under Sec. 406 and 420 IPC. If there is any reduction of extent the remedy lies somewhere else under the civil law, for which no criminal liability can be extended either under Sec. 406 or under Sec. 420 IPC. Hence, the FIR, final report and its further proceedings are hereby quashed.

¶45

Both the Crl.M.Cs. are allowed accordingly.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

JUDGE

msp

Crl.MC.6589/2015, Crl.MC.838/2017 5

¶51

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 6589/2015

¶52

PETITIONER'S/S ANNEXURES:

¶53

ANNEXURE A	TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION NOTICE PUBLSIHED IN MATHRUBHUMI,PALAKAD EDN.DATED 20-5-2006
ANNEXURE B	TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI PALAKKAD EDN. DATED 23-1-2007
ANNEXURE C	TRUE COPY OF THE SALE CERTIFICATE DATED 21- 11-2007
ANNEXURE D	TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.516 OF 2010,TANUR SRO DATED 1-2-2010
ANNEXURE E	TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- I,KOZHIKODE IN CC.729 OF 2015 DATED 25-3- 2015.

¶54

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES:NIL

¶55

Crl.MC.6589/2015, Crl.MC.838/2017 6

¶56

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 838/2017

¶57

PETITIONER'S/S ANNEXURES:

¶58

ANNEXURE A	TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION NOTICE PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI, PALAKKAD EDN.DTD 20/5/2006
ANNEXURE B	TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI PALAKKAD EDN. DTD 23/1/2007
ANNEXURE C	TRUE COPY OF SALE CERTIFICATE DTD 21/11/2007
ANNEXURE D	TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO 516/2010 TANUR SRO DTD 1/2/2010
ANNEXURE E	TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOZHIKODE IN CC.729 OF 2015 DTD 25/3/2015
ANNEXURE F	TRUE COPY OF INTERIM STAY EXTENSION ORDER IN CRL.MC NO 6589/2015, HIGH COURT OF KERALA DTD 5/12/2016.

¶59

//TRUE COPY//

¶60

PA. TO JUDGE

Sasidharan K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasidharan K. 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

Jolly Thomas Vs Annamma Joseph

Ajithkumar Vs Biju @ Vijayakumar

Ebrahim Haji Vs State of Kerala

K.Chandran Vs State of Kerala

P. Abdulla Koya Vs the State of Kerala

K.P.Lathakumari Vs State of Kerala