Dismissed¶35

Gowri Shanker, v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Apr 2025Crl.MC/2449/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quash petition dismissed; Crl.M.C 2449/2020; Kerala High Court, Ernakulam; G. Girish, J.; 2025:KER:27585; Sections 447 and 427 IPC read with Section 34 IPC; criminal trespass; mischief; CC No.939/2017 JFCM Tripunithura; Crime No.494/2017 Hill Palace Police Station Ernakulam; FIR 12.3.2017; Final Report 28/03/2017; mediation failed; vakalath relinquished; no representation; allegations constitute requisite particulars; truth/falsity to be tested at trial.

What did the court decide?

From the Final Report and accompanying records, the Investigating Agency had garnered the requisite materials to substantiate the offence alleged against the petitioner; the allegations levelled against the petitioner would constitute the requisite particulars of the offence of criminal trespass and mischief alleged against him. ¶31

Gowri Shanker, Vs the State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner (2nd accused) in CC No.939/2017, alleging offences under Sections 447 and 427 IPC read with Section 34 IPC (criminal trespass and mischief), should be quashed on his contention that the offence would not be attracted even accepting the de facto complainant's accusations in totality.

¶24

Court's answer

¶31

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner cannot seek exit from facing the trial before the learned Magistrate; the truth or falsity of the allegations in the final report are to be tested in the trial before the learned Magistrate.

¶31

Key takeaways

The prayer in the petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be entertained.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Kerala High Court (G. Girish, J.), Crl.M.C No.2449/2020 (decided 01.04.2025; neutral citation 2025:KER:27585): Petition by the 2nd accused in CC No.939/2017 (Crime No.494/2017, Hill Palace Police Station) seeking quashing of proceedings for offences under Sections 447 and 427 IPC read with Section 34 IPC - alleged criminal trespass with the 1st accused into the sitout of the de facto complainant's house on 9.3.2017 and mischief by writing in black paint on the gate and walls that the property was mortgaged to a private financial institution. Mediation referred on 13.11.2024 failed (Nodal Officer report dated 26.12.2024 - petitioner did not attend); petitioner's counsel relinquished vakalath on 13.3.2025 and there was no representation on the date of decision. Holding that the Investigating Agency had garnered the requisite materials, that the allegations would constitute the requisite particulars of criminal trespass and mischief, and that the truth or falsity of the final report's allegations were to be tested in trial before the learned Magistrate, the court found the quash prayer not entertainable and dismissed the petition.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 2449 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.494/2017 OF HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶7

CC NO.939 OF 2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT, TRIPUNITHURA

¶8

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶9

GOWRI SHANKER,

¶10

AGED 39 YEARS

¶11

S/O. H.R.S. PRAKASH, NO.46, 2ND CROSS ROAD, SANJAY
NAGAR, MARUTHAHALLY P.O., BANGALORE, PIN-560037,
BANGALORE DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE.

¶12

BY ADVS.
SRI.ANEESH JAMES
SRI.JIJO THOMAS
SMT.M.D BEENA

¶13

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶14

1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682011.

¶15

2 MR. ANIL KUMAR,
AGED 50, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, SURYAN HOUSE, HOSPITAL
ROAD, NEAR POOJA CRICKET GROUND, THRIPUNITHURA,
PIN-682031, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶16

BY ADV SRI.BIBIN KUMAR

¶17

SMT SEETHA S, SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

2025:KER:27585

¶20

Crl.M.C No.2449/2020 2

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in CC No.939/2017, on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Tripunithura. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 447 and 427 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

¶23

The prosecution case is that on 9.3.2017, the petitioner, along with the 1st accused, criminally trespassed into the sitout of the house of the de facto complainant, and committed mischief by writing with black paint upon the gate and walls of the said house that the above property is mortgaged to a private financial institution. The case has been registered by the Hill Palace Police, Ernakulam city, on 12.3.2017, on the basis of the First Information Statement given by the de facto complainant. After the completion of the investigation, the SI of Police, Hill Palace Police Station, laid the Final Report.

¶24

In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that the offence alleged in this case will not be attracted even if the entire accusations levelled by the de facto complainant, are accepted in totality.

¶25

The matter was referred for mediation on the basis of the

¶26

Crl.M.C No.2449/2020 3

¶27

2025:KER:27585

¶28

submissions of the counsel representing both sides, on 13.11.2024. However, the Nodal Officer of the High Court Mediation Centre, Ernakulam, submitted a report dated 26.12.2024, stating that the mediation could not be conducted, since the petitioner did not turn up. On 13.3.2025, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has relinquished the vakalath of the petitioner. Accordingly, the case was adjourned to this date.

¶29

When the matter is taken up for consideration today, there is no representation for the petitioner.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

¶31

It is seen from the Final Report and the accompanying records that the Investigating Agency had garnered the requisite materials to substantiate the offence alleged against the petitioner. CW2 is the witness who is said to have seen the incident, which took place at the residence of the de facto complainant. The allegations levelled against the petitioner would constitute the requisite particulars of the offence of criminal trespass and mischief alleged against him. Therefore, the petitioner cannot seek exit from facing the trial before the learned Magistrate. The truth or falsity of the

¶32

2025:KER:27585

¶33

Crl.M.C No.2449/2020 4

¶34

allegations in the final report are to be tested in the trial before the learned Magistrate. In the above circumstances, the prayer in this petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be entertained.

¶35

In the result, the petition is hereby dismissed.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

G.GIRISH JUDGE

¶38

IAP

¶39

2025:KER:27585

¶40

Crl.M.C No.2449/2020 5

¶41

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2449/2020

¶42

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:

¶43

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME NO.494/2017 OF THE HILL
PALACE POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
28/03/2017 IN CRIME NO.494/2017 OF THE HILL
PALACE POLICE STATION ON THE FILE OF THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,
THRIPUNITHURA.

Gowri Shanker, v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gowri Shanker, v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Vs State of Kerala

Anees.a Vs Irem Irshad

Navas.K.K Vs the State of Kerala

Subi Balan @ Subi Vishnu Das Vs Rajendran

Rahul Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

T. Dhruvan, Vs State of Kerala