Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN
Raji Joshi Alias Reji Joshi W/o Joshi – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to order based on forged document. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. appeal arguments based on supreme court decisions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. observations on applicability of section 195 cr.p.c. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 16 , 18) |
| 4. decision on trial requirements under ipc. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 17) |
| 5. final dismissal and directions for trial. (Para 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
1. This appeal has been filed under Section 380 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (`BNSS’ for short hereafter) challenging the order dated 08.05.2015 in M.C.No.2/2014 arising out of O.P(MV) No.1701/2007 on the files of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (`MACT’ for short hereafter), Perumbavoor. The respondent herein is the State of Kerala.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/respondent as well as the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the order impugned as well as the relevant documents, including the decisions placed by the learned counsel for the appellant.
3. On the facts of this case, the appellant herein is the 1st respondent in O.P(MV).No.1701/2007 on the files of the MACT, Perumbavoor. M.C.No.2/2014 was suo motu registered by the Tribunal when it fou
The court confirmed that presenting a forged document constitutes a serious offense warranting prosecution under relevant legal provisions, emphasizing the need for judicial integrity.
Section 415 of IPC mandates that there should be inducement from hands of accused to victim to part with any property and transaction should be tainted with dishonest intention right from its outset.
The court held that allegations of forgery and cheating in the FIR do not have a predominantly civil profile and are not barred under Section 195(1)(b)(i) of Cr.P.C., thus the FIR cannot be quashed.
The court clarified that Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of Cr.P.C. limits cognizance of forgery only if it occurs after the document has been submitted in court.
A valid written complaint is required under Section 195 Cr.P.C. to initiate criminal proceedings for forgery related to evidence presented in court, highlighting procedural safeguards against wrongfu....
The court ruled that charges under IPC Sections 193 and 471 require a prior written complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C., highlighting the jurisdictional limits on the Magistrate's authority to frame ....
Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Cr.P.C. only bars prosecution for offences related to documents after such documents are presented in court.
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
