Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH, J
Nazeer P.C., S/o. L.K. Usman – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER:
G.GIRISH, J.
The petitioner is the accused in CC No.515/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg. The allegation against him is that he committed offence under Section 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 117(e) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011.
2. The prosecution case is that in between 11 am and 6.30 pm, on 06.03.2018, the petitioner continuously telephoned the Sub Inspector of Police, Neeleswaram, to his land phone and mobile phone, and subjected him to verbal abuse and also threatened him from proceeding against a complaint which the Sub Inspector has received against the petitioner.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
4. The case has been registered suo moto by the Sub Inspector of Police, Neeleswaram, on 06.03.2018, after he received threatening phone calls from the petitioner. It is stated that the Sub Inspector of Police had intervened, when he received a complaint from a lady that the petitioner herein had been verbally abusing her over telephone and thus harassing her. The Sub Inspector of Police, Neeleswaram, is stated to have contacted the peti
The court upheld the charges of verbal abuse and threats against a police officer, affirming that sufficient evidence existed to proceed with prosecution under the IPC and Kerala Police Act.
Criminal intimidation and verbal abuse are insufficient to constitute offenses under IPC; necessary sanctions are mandatory for non-cognizable offenses under the Kerala Police Act.
The mere use of abusive language does not constitute obscenity under IPC unless it arouses sexual thoughts; allegations of rash driving and obstruction of duty were upheld.
Criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when barred by limitation or lacking essential ingredients of alleged offenses.
The determination of intent in obstructing police duties must be evaluated through trial evidence; compounding options exist for the accused.
Allegations of stalking and obscenity must meet legal thresholds of intent and evidence; mere accusations without substantiation are insufficient for prosecution.
The court confirmed the order taking cognizance under Section 354A IPC and Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act while setting aside the cognizance under Sections 500 and 501 IPC due to a legal pro....
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
