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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 85187

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZARA MICHELE SHILANSKY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent
Crl.MC 6800/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 19TH BHADRA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 6800 OF 2024 CRIME NO.390/2024 OF Fort Kochi Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.462 OF 2024 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, MATTANCHERY PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

ZARA MICHELE SHILANSKY, AGED 38 YEARS D/O. CYRIL JEFFEY SHILANSKY, U 103/2, ULMARRA PI, EAST LIND FIELD, NSW AUSTRALIA 2070, PASSPORT NO.

AUS PEO395031 BY ADVS.

BLAZE K.JOSE NIKHIL SANJAY TREESA ROSE AIRINE JOBY RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FORT KOCHI POLICE STATION,, PIN - 682031

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE FORT KOCHI POLICE STATION, KOCHI,, PIN - 682001

3 MUHAMMED AZEEM K. S.

S/O. SHAMSUDEEN, HOUSE NO. 6/1522, MARTHANDAMPARAMBU, MATTANCHERRY, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682001 OTHER PRESENT:

SMT. SREEJA V (PP)

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

10.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

“C.R.”

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J ......….............................................

Crl.M.C.No. 6800 of 2024 …................................................

Dated this the 10th day of September, 2024

ORDER

Amidst the large number of tourists that flock to Kerala -

“God’s own country”, petitioner was unfortunate to have faced the traumatic incident of being arrested alleging the commission of an offence under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Further, after obtaining bail in the said crime, while she was about to leave the country, she was detained at the Kochi International Airport pursuant to a lookout notice issued at the behest of the police that too, for a bailable offence. In the meantime, the final report was filed and cognizance has been taken by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Mattanchery as C.C. No.462/2024. Petitioner challenges the said criminal proceedings through this petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

2. The incident that led to the registration of Crime No.390/2024 of Fort Kochi Police Station against the petitioner revolves around two banners kept at Fort Kochi - a tourist destination in Kerala. The two posters kept by some unknown organization contained the slogan “SILENCE IS VIOLENCE, STAND UP FOR HUMANITY”. Perturbed by the two posters, petitioner, a lady of Jewish descent but an Australian citizen and her friend, after being unsuccessful in their attempt to get it removed through the tourism office, felt it necessary to remove them. The banners apparently generated in her mind, impressions about the ongoing war between Palestine and Israel. Petitioner thereafter, allegedly tore the two banners. The 3rd respondent who is purported to be the Area Secretary of the Students Islamic Organization (SIO), a student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami, filed a complaint alleging that the posters put up in front of the boat jetty at Fort Kochi were destroyed by two tourists inappropriately, and requested the Police to register a crime.

3. Pursuant to the above complaint, FIR No.390/2024 of Fort Kochi Police Station was registered, and a final report was filed, alleging an offence punishable under Section 153 IPC.

Subsequently, the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mattancheri, took cognizance of the offence as C.C.No.462/2024. The petitioner, who is the sole accused in the above crime, seeks to quash the said proceedings.

4. Sri.Blaze K Jose, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that, the uncontroverted allegations in the final report do not make out the offence alleged and therefore the prosecution is liable to be quashed. The learned counsel further submitted that the two posters that were allegedly destroyed by the petitioner were admittedly not legally permissible posters and hence even if it is assumed that they were destroyed by the petitioner, the same could

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top