SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Ker) 172

J.M.JAMES
K. U. Ettoop – Appellant
Versus
M. K. Kunhikannan – Respondent


Judgment :-

Petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in C.C.No.440/2004, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thalassery. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 341 and 506(ii) I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. Petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash Annexure-II complaint filed by the first respondent, the complainant, against them.

2. The interesting brief facts are that the petitioners, two Advocates of Thalassery Bar, are alleged to have wrongfully restrained the first respondent, also an Advocate of the same Bar, and criminally intimidated him, by threatening that if the first respondent continued to harass the second accused, he would not walk on his two legs. The 3rd accused in Annexure-II complaint also threatened the first respondent. Hence, he filed a complaint before the Magistrate and that had been forwarded to the Thalassery police, which after investigation, referred the same, and issued Annexure-I refer notice to the first respondent. It was thereafter that Annexure-II complaint has been preferred before the court below.

3. During the pendency of this petition, the parties have settled the matter amo









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top