Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
RAJU K. A – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioners face charges relating to theft of fixed deposits. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. the court examines arguments regarding the lack of evidence against the petitioners. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. no charges can be framed against the petitioners due to absence of prima facie evidence. (Para 6) |
O R D E R
The petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 9 in C.C. No.756 of 2019 pending before the Judicial First Magistrate Court-I, Kothamangalam. Accused no.1 is the daughter-in-law of the defacto complainant. The petitioners are the retired employees of Kothamangalam Service Co-operative Bank (for short ‘the bank’). The petitioners along with accused no.1 faced trial for the offences punishable under Sections 406 , 409, 419, 420 and 120(B) of the IPC .
2. Admittedly, the defacto complainant had two fixed deposits in the bank. The prosecution case, in short, is that accused no.1, who is the daughter-in-law of the defacto complainant, stole the above two fixed deposit receipts from the house of the defacto complainant and colluding with the petitioners, withdrew the amount covered by the fixed deposits by impersonation and thereafter deposited only a portion of the amount withdrawn.
3. The pe
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
