Dismissed

Rishad K. M v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jul 2024Crl.MC/993/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court refused to quash proceedings for serious offences including allegations of assault and robbery. The Court dismissed the plea, ruling that material sifting was not possible at this stage and the petitioner could seek discharge at the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to approach trial court with an application for discharge if legally entitled.

Rishad K. M Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶4

CRL.MC NO. 993 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.1015/2022 OF Infopark Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CP NO.29 OF 2023 OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD
PETITIONER:

¶6

RISHAD K. M
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMAD SHAREEF,
RAZRISH VILLA,
ELLATHU NAGAR,
PALLURUTHY P.O
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682006
BY ADVS.
PADMA LAKSHMI
HASEENA T.

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031

¶9

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE INFOPARK POLICE STATION, KAKKANAD, PIN - 682042

¶10

OTHER PRESENT:

¶11

SRI. ASHI M.C (PP)

¶12

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
11.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

CRL.MC NO. 993 OF 2024

¶14

¶15

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶16

Crl.M.C. No. 993 of 2024

¶17

Dated this the 11^th day of July, 2024

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Petitioner is the 7^th accused in Crime No. 1015 of 2022 of

¶20

Infopark Police Station, Ernakulam which is now pending as C.P.No.29/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kakkanad. He challenges the aforesaid proceedings pending against him in this proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶21

According to the prosecution, the accused had on 23-12-2022, trespassed into a beauty clinic and assaulted the defacto complainant and committed decoity and other serious crimes using dangerous weapons and thereby committed the offences under Sections 452, 324, 326, 384, 395, 427, 506(ii) , 201 and 212 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶22

Adv.Padma Lakshmi, the learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently contended that the offences alleged against the 7^th accused are not made out at all. It was further submitted that even a perusal of the entire materials collected by the prosecution would not indicate any offence committed by the petitioner, and therefore the

¶23

¶24

CRL.MC NO. 993 OF 2024

¶25

prosecution is a futile exercise, and hence the proceedings ought to be quashed.

¶26

Sri.M.C.Ashi, the learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that there are sufficient materials to connect the petitioner with the crime, and the final report itself indicates the role played by the petitioner.

¶27

Since the allegations levelled against the petitioner and other accused are serious in nature, sifting of materials collected by the prosecution is not possible at this stage. At this stage of the proceedings, I am not inclined to quash the proceedings. Though the petitioner contends that the materials produced by the prosecution do not reflect any criminal conduct on the part of the petitioner and that there are no materials to connect him with the crime, I am of the view that if the petitioner is so advised, he is at liberty to approach the trial court with an application for discharge, if legally entitled to.

¶28

Therefore, reserving the liberty of the petitioner to apply for discharge in accordance with law, if legally entitled to, this Crl.M.C is dismissed.

¶29

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶30

AJM

¶31

CRL.MC NO. 993 OF 2024

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 993/2024

¶34

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶35

`AnnexureA 1`	`TRUE` `CRIME` `STATI`	`COPY` `NO.` `ON, KA`	`OF FIR DATED 25/12/2022 IN` `1015/2022 OF INFOPARK POLICE` `KKANAD`
`Annexure A2`	`TRUE` `16/12`	`COPY` `/2023`	`OF CHARGESHEET RECEVIED DATED`
`Annexure A3`	`TRUE` `DATED`	`COPY` `16/12`	`OF WITNESS STATEMENT RECEIVED` `/2023`
`Annexure A4`	`TRUE` `DATED`	`COPY` `16/12`	`OF SEIZURE MAHAZAR RECEVIED` `/2023`
`Annexure A4(a)`	`TRUE` `DATE`	`COPY` `16/12/`	`OF CRIME SCENE MAHAZR RECEIVED` `2023`

Rishad K. M v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishad K. M 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

Anandu @ Sachu, Vs State of Kerala

Satish Vasudevan Sathi Nair Vs State of Kerala

Vijayasree Vs Sudhakaran Pillai

Fr. Antony Chillittassery Vs State of Kerala

Sulaiman Vs Mohamed Naufal

Fr. Johnson Jose Kakkattu Vs State of Kerala