Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
T. J. Josy, @ Thaiveettil Jovakkim Josy – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
A. Badharudeen, J.
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.543/2022 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, and the prayer herein is as under:
To quash Annexure-I, C.C.No.543/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kochi (Initially numbered as C.M.P.No.3031/2021) and Annexure-VIII order.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant. Also heard the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. The prosecution come forth when Annexure 1 complaint was lodged by the 2nd respondent before the Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Kochi. The allegation in the complaint is that, the accused herein criminally trespassed upon the house belonged to the complainant, which was obtained on the strength of a gift deed on 11.10.2021, after breaking of its door in the absence of the complainant, who is the 2nd respondent and her husband. The learned Magistrate proceeded with Annexure 1 complaint and recorded the sworn statements of the complainant and witnesses. Ultim
Possession based on a valid title deed suffices for establishing criminal trespass unless declared void by a competent court; a Magistrate must provide a reasoned order when taking cognizance.
The court emphasized that criminal trespass requires proof of intent and possession, and a cognizance order must be detailed and reasoned, not cryptic.
If possession itself is not with the complainant, there can be no offence of criminal trespass into property not belonging to complainant.
The court can quash criminal proceedings under inherent powers if the allegations stem from a civil dispute and fail to establish a prima facie case for the alleged criminal offences.
(1) If once court of competent jurisdiction did not take cognizance of offences when a complaint was made and said order became final, another complaint on same allegations though filed by complainan....
A magistrate must apply mind and provide reasoning when taking cognizance of complaints; failure to do so allows for quashing of proceedings to prevent abuse of process.
Point of law : Whenever a Magistrate decides to refer a complaint to investigation by police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., he does not take cognizance, he awaits the filing of charge sheet and takes ....
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
