Back
P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN
M. A. Vaheed – Appellant
Versus
K. K. Lathika – Respondent
ORDER :
These three Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are connected and therefore I am disposing of these cases by a common order.
2. Petitioners and 1st respondents in these cases were Members of the Kerala Legislative Assembly. Petitioners in Crl.M.C. Nos.3178/2016 and 2111/2016 are the accused in C.C. No.1389/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – III, Thiruvananthapuram. The 1st respondent in these cases is the complainant in the above cases. Petitioner in Crl.M.C. No. 370/2016 is the 1st accused in C.C. No.1390/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – III, Thiruvananthapuram. The 1srt respondent in the above case is the complainant in that case. The alleged incident in these cases happened on 13.03.2015 in the Kerala Legislative Assembly.
3. I will narrate the facts in Crl.M.C. Nos.3178/2016 and 2111/2016 which are filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 1389/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – III, Thiruvananthapuram. Petitioners are the accused in the above case. They were the members of the Kerala Legislative Assembly. The gist of the allegation in the complaint filed against the petitioners by the 1st r
Charges under Section 354 IPC cannot be sustained without evidence demonstrating intent to outrage modesty; however, a charge under Section 352 IPC was upheld based on allegations of using criminal f....
The conviction under Section 354 IPC was set aside due to insufficient evidence of intent to outrage modesty, while the conviction under Section 323 IPC was modified to a lenient sentence.
The court held that the allegations of assault and outraging modesty were sufficient to proceed with a trial under Sections 323 and 354 IPC.
Legal proceedings can be quashed if they are established to be maliciously instituted without sufficient evidence, causing an abuse of judicial process.
Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person’s consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it to be likely th....
Allegations of stalking and obscenity must meet legal thresholds of intent and evidence; mere accusations without substantiation are insufficient for prosecution.
The court upheld the conviction under minor offences despite failure to substantiate major charges, emphasizing mens rea in determining the conviction under Section 354 IPC.
Summoning of an accused under IPC Section 354 requires clear evidence; unexplained delays and lack of corroborating witnesses render allegations insufficient.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
