Allowed

K.J.James v. Mr. Babu P. Kuriakose

Kerala HC1 Apr 2024Crl.MC/2864/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner wrongly arrayed as accused for cheating and criminal breach of trust relating to a chitty run by a private limited company sought quashing of proceedings. With only a branch-inauguration notice linking him to the company, proceedings were quashed as abuse of court process.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings against petitioner in C.C.No.891/2016 before JFMC Kattappana quashed.

K.J.James Vs Mr. Babu P. Kuriakose — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 12TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 2864 OF 2019

¶6

CC NO.891 OF 2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,

¶7

KATTAPPANA

¶8

PETITIONER/ 2ND ACCUSED :

¶9

K.J.JAMES

¶10

AGED 63 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH , RESIDING AT KANJIRATHINMOODU HOUSE, NEAR NSS COLLEGE, PUZHAVATHU, CHANGANASSERY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT

¶11

BY ADVS. SMT.AYSHA ABRAHAM SMT.ANUPA DAS SRI.S.SARATH PRASAD

¶12

SRI.YASHWANTH SHENOY

¶13

RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT & STATE :

¶14

1 MR. BABU P. KURIAKOSE S/O KURIAKOSE, RESIDING AT PALLATHUKUDI HOUSE, ADIMLI KARA, MANNAMKANDAM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 561.

¶15

2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶16

BY SRI.RENJITH T.R., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 2864 OF 2019

¶19

¶20

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.2864 of 2019

¶22

Dated this the 1^st day of April, 2024

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Petitioner challenges the proceedings in C.C.No.891 of 2016 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kattappana in so far as he has been arrayed as the first accused. The prosecution alleges that the accused (4 in number) had cheated the defacto complainant and committed criminal breach of trust and thereby committed the offences under Sections 409 and 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶25

The issue relates to subscriptions to a chitty managed by a company under name M/s. Apple Tree Chits India Pvt. Ltd. The defacto complainant and others are alleged to have remitted amounts towards the chitty and thereafter the accused failed to return the amounts and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶26

I have heard Sri.Yashwanth Shenoy, duly instructed by Smt.Ayshamma Abraham, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Renjith T.R., the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶27

The petitioner has been roped in as an accused on the allegation that he is the Chairman of M/s. Apple Tree Chits India Pvt. Ltd.. Strangely, there are no materials produced by the prosecution to indicate

¶28

¶29

CRL.MC NO. 2864 OF 2019

¶30

that petitioner is in any way connected with the said company. The only material referred to by the prosecution is a notice issued regarding the inauguration of one of the branches of the aforementioned company. Reference to a name in a notice cannot be a link that connects a person with a private limited company. In the absence of any document appointing the petitioner as the Chairman or as the person in charge of the affairs of the company, petitioner can remain only as a stranger to the company.

¶31

It is apposite in this context to refer to the orders of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.5918 of 2017 and Crl.M.C.No.7774 of 2018 wherein, in similar situations, the cases against the petitioner were quashed by this Court, after noticing that there was no evidence to link the petitioner with the company or with the offence alleged.

¶32

On a perusal of the final report in the instant case, this Court notices that except for a bald allegation that petitioner is the Chairman of M/s. Apple Tree Chits India Pvt. Ltd., there is nothing on record to connect him either with the company or with the offences alleged. A notice issued as an advertisement by some stranger, cannot mulct the petitioner with criminal liability that too for the acts of a private limited company. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.891 of 2016 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kattappana is an abuse of the process of the court.

¶33

CRL.MC NO. 2864 OF 2019

¶34

¶35

Accordingly, the proceeding against the petitioner in C.C.No.891 of 2016 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kattappana is hereby quashed.

¶36

The Crl.M.C.is allowed as above.

¶37

Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶38

RKM

¶39

CRL.MC NO. 2864 OF 2019

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2864/2019

¶42

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

¶43

ANNEXURE A1	CERTIFIED COPY FILED BY THE 1 JFMC KATTAPPANA.	OF ST	THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
ANNEXURE A2	CERTIFIED COPY 1605/2013 OF ADI	OF MALI	THE FIR IN CRIME POLICE.
ANNEXURE A3	CERTIFIED COPY CRIME 1605/ 2013	OF OF	THE FINAL REPORT IN ADIMALI POLICE.
ANNEXURE A4	CERTIFIED COPY O IN CRIME 1605/20	F TH 13 O	E ADDITIONAL STATEMENT F ADIMALI POLICE.
ANNEXURE A5	TRUE COPY OF TH OF ASSOCIATION INDIA PVT LTD.	E ME OF	MORANDUM AND ARTICLES M/S APPLE TREE CHITS
ANNEXURE A6	TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER FROM NO 1194 OF 201 MAGISTRATE-111,	THE THE 5 OF NEYY	ORDER DEALING THE ARRAY OF ACCUSED IN CC JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS ATTINKARA
ANNEXURE A7	TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER FROM NO 1195 OF 201 MAGISTRATE-111,	THE THE 5 OF NEYY	ORDER DELETING THE ARRAY OF ACCUSED IN CC JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS ATTINKARA
ANNEXURE A8	TRUE COPY OF PETITIONER FROM NO 1196 OF 201 MAGISTRATE-111,	THE THE 5 OF NEYY	ORDER DELETING THE ARRAY OF ACCUSED IN CC JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS ATTINKARA

K.J.James v. Mr. Babu P. Kuriakose

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.J.James v. Mr. Babu P. Kuriakose

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savad.P Vs State of Kerala

T.K. Gangan Menon Vs Authorised Officer

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

George Antony Vs State of Kerala

Dalu R.Das, Vs Dinesh Lal

K.J.James Vs G.Jayaraj