Dismissed

Anoop Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Nov 2022Crl.MC/7675/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash S.C. No. 322/2022, the accused argued that allegations did not disclose an offence and identification was flawed. The High Court held that the first information statement and investigation record made out the case, and the effects the Section 482 CrPC was not invoked to quash the petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petition to quash proceedings is dismissed.

Anoop Mathew Vs the State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

CRL.MC NO. 7675 OF 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶6

CRL.MC NO. 7675 OF 2022

¶7

CRIME NO.44/2022 OF Thamarassery Police Station, Kozhikode
SC 322/2022 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (FOR THE TRIAL OF
CASES RELATING TO ATROCITIES & SEXUAL VIOLENCE TOWARDS
WOMEN AND CHILDREN), KOZHIKODE

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

ANOOP MATHEW, AGED 33 YEARS
S/O MATHAI @ MATHEW, VALIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU,
SHANTHI NAGAR P.O., OMASSERRY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673572
BY ADV SATHEESH MOHANAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031

¶12

BY SMT.T.V.NEEMA-SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶14

CRL.MC NO. 7675 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This Crl.M.C has been filed to quash all further proceedings

¶18

in S.C No.322/2022 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court

¶19

(for the trial of cases relating to Atrocities and Sexual Violence towards Women and Children), Kozhikode.

¶20

The petitioner is the sole accused. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 354A(1)(ii), 354A(1)(iv), 354D and 509 of IPC and Section 11(i), 11(iv) and 12 of the Protection of Children from the Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶21

I have heard Sri.Satheeshmohanan, the learned counsel

¶22

for the petitioner and Smt.T.V.Neema, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶24

even if the entire allegations in the first information statement together with the materials collected during investigation are

¶25

CRL.MC NO. 7675 OF 20223

¶26

taken at their face value, no offences alleged against the petitioner are made out. The counsel further submitted that there is no proper identification of the accused.

¶27

I went through the first information statement as well

¶28

as entire records. There are clear averments to attract the ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioner. It is true that the petitioner was wearing a helmet at the time of the incident. However, the victim clearly stated that since the front portion of the helmet was open, she could clearly see the face of the petitioner. Later on, she identified the petitioner during investigation. When prima facie case is made out, the jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C

¶29

cannot be invoked. Hence, the Crl.M.C is dismissed.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Anoop Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Mathew 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

K.N.Raju Vs Inspector, K.C.W.R. & W.F.Board

Febina K.A Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Kabeer Vs State of Kerala

Anoop Iype Mathew Vs Ebin Mathew Iype (Minor)

Shahitha Seeravalappil Vs State of Kerala

Abhijith Vs State of Kerala