Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SANEESH BABU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused persons challenge cognizance based on procedural flaws. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. magistrate's reliance on witness statements vs police reports. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. established procedural requirements for cognizance. (Para 5) |
| 4. outcome mandates remand for proper procedural compliance. (Para 6) |
ORDER
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2026 The accused persons 1 and 2 in C.C No. 1449 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery instituted on the basis of a private complaint. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341 , 323, 324, 294(b), 506(ii)
and 447 r/w 34 of the IPC .
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, originally the Panoor police registered Crime No. 80 of 2021 with respect to the very same incident and after investigation, filed Annexure A3 final report referring the above case as false. Further according to the learned counsel, the learned Magistrate without referring to Annexure A3 refer report and solely relying upon the statements given by the witnesses in the enquiry conducted by him, passed Annexure A5 order and took cognizance of the offences referred above against the petitio
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
