Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
XAVIER MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 5499 OF 2020

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
For the Respondents: PRAVEEN K. JOY, MARIA PAUL, THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL

The rights of petitioners to challenge the final report or seek discharge before the Trial Court are upheld despite the dismissal of the Crl.M.C.

Headnote:This judgement addresses a Criminal Miscellaneous Case aimed at quashing an FIR in Crime No.463 of 2020 regarding alleged offences under Sections 420 and 406 IPC. The facts reveal that both parties conceded the investigation's completion, leading to the dismissal of the Crl.M.C. while preserving the petitioners' right to challenge the final report before the Trial Court. The main issues framed by the court include the legality of the FIR and the implications for the petitioners. The court reasoned that the petitioners may file for discharge if no charges have been framed, thereby ensuring their rights under the law. The final judgement dismissing the Crl.M.C. is to be considered under the specified conditions.

Table of Content
1. quashing of fir regarding ipc offences. (Para 1)
2. preservation of rights to challenge final report. (Para 2)

O R D E R

The Crl.M.C. is filed to quash Annexure VI FIR in Crime No.463 of 2020 registered by the Panangad Police Station, Ernakulam, alleging commission of the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code .

2. It is conceded by both sides that, the investigation is complete and the final report has been filed before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-VIII, Ernakulam. The case stands numbered as C.C.No.821 of

2024.

In light of the above submission, Crl.M.C. is dismissed, but by reserving the right of the petitioners to either challenge the final report or file an application for discharge before the Trial Court, provided if the charge has not been framed. If such an application is filed, the same shall be considered, in accordance with law, untramelled by any observations made in this order.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMC.S.DIAS, JXAVIER MATHEW – AppellantVersusSTATE OF KERALA – RespondentCRL.MC NO. 5499 OF 2020

The rights of petitioners to challenge the final report or seek discharge before the Trial Court are upheld despite the dismissal of the Crl.M.C.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
XAVIER MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 5499 OF 2020