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

2018 Supreme(Ker) 205

A.M.BABU
Joseph – Appellant
Versus
Antony Joseph – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri. Thomas J. Anakkallunkal, Sri. M. Revikrishnan
For the Respondent: Sri. S. Rajeev, Sri. K.K. Dheerendrakrishnan

ORDER :

1. Relief is sought under Sec.482 of Cr.P.C. Petitioners are the accused persons in C.C.314/2011 on the file of the court of the judicial magistrate of the first class, Erattupetta. They allegedly committed offences punishable under Secs 427 and 447 of IPC read with IPC 34. They seek to quash the criminal prosecution against them.

2. Facts are simple and go as under : The compound wall of the property of the 1st respondent was demolished on the night of 3.4.2011. He filed a complaint before the magistrate. It was alleged in it that the compound wall was demolished by petitioners 1 and 2 and two others who could be identified by sight. The learned magistrate forwarded the complaint to the local station house officer under Sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The station house officer was directed to hold an investigation. Thereupon an FIR was registered. Investigation was conducted. A report under Sec. 173(2) of Cr.P.C was filed. A copy of it is annex-A. The petitioners moved a Crl.M.C before this court to get annex-A final report quashed. This court dismissed the said Crl.M.C holding that there were sufficient allegations in the final report, if proved, to sustain a conviction. Annex-F is







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