P.D.RAJAN
H. G. Mathews Mar Ivaniose – Appellant
Versus
Thomas Mar Athanasious Diocesan Metropolitan (Orthodox) – Respondent
1. The petitioner was the former Metropolitan of the Kandanad Diocese, appointed by the Patriarch of Antioch. He has preferred this petition to quash Annexure-I complaint and Annexure-J order in C.M.P.No.4796/2011 in C.C.No.85/2012, of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha. The 1st respondent, who is the Metropolitan of Kandanad East Diocese filed a complaint in the CJM, Court, Thodupuzha, for the offences u/ss.423, 465, 468 and 471 r/w.34 IPC and u/s.120B of IPC against the petitioner and two others, which was forwarded to the Police Station Thodupuzha for investigation u/s.156(3) of Cr.PC. and after investigation the Police referred the case. The petitioner contended that prima facie case is not made out in the complaint and if trial is proceeded, it is a mere abuse of the process of the Court. Hence, the petitioner prays to quash Annexures-I and J by invoking the inherent jurisdiction.
2. The 1st respondent, who is the Metropolitan of Kandanad East Diocese is functioning according to the Constitution framed in the year 1934. There are several churches under the control of this Diocese and St.Mary's Orthodox Syrian Church, Thodupuzha is one of the churches. Ever
Parameswaran Nair v. Surendran [2009(1) KLT 794]
Kader v. State of Kerala [1999 (3) KLT 262]
P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Thoma [AIR 1995 SC 2001]
Moran Mar Thoma Mathews v. Most. Rev. Thomas Mar De Metropolitan [2002 (1) KLT 125]
P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Marthoma Mathews [AIR 1996 SC 3121]
M/s. India Carat Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1989 SC 885)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.