Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
B.KEMAL PASHA, J
A BALAKRISHNAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. CASE 6781/2014
Legal - Criminal Offences - IPC Sections 353, 427, Cr.P.C. Section 155(2) - The court resolved the sustainability of charges under IPC Sections based on the status of the Secretary and the necessity of criminal force for Section 353.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner is accused of deterring the duties of a Secretary of a Co-operative Society and causing a minor financial loss by damaging society records.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the charge under Section 353 IPC unsustainable since the Secretary was not a public servant. The court acknowledged the possibility of additional charges under Section 427 IPC.
Issues: Whether the charges under Section 353 IPC were maintainable against a non-public servant and if the charges under Section 427 IPC were proved.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that without the Secretary being classified as a public servant, Section 353 IPC could not apply. The existence of Section 427 IPC charges remains contingent on proving the alleged damage.
Final Decision: The court quashed the charge under Section 353 IPC but allowed consideration of Section 427 IPC.
O R D E R
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Petitioner is the accused in CC.2685/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kasaragod, based on Annexure-E final report in Crime No.951/2010 of Kasaragod Police Station for the offences under Sections 353 and 427 IPC. The allegation against the petitioner is that he deterred the discharge of the duty of the Secretary of a Co-operative Society and took the minutes book and tore away ten pages of it, thereby causing a wrongful loss of `250/- to the Co-operative Society.
2. When the Secretary of a Co-operative Society is not a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 IPC, the offence under Section 353 IPC is not legally sustainable. Apart from that, there is no allegation that he had assaulted or used criminal force. At the same time, there are Crl.M.C.6781/2014 allegations to invite the offence under Section 427 IPC. Of course, it depends on proof of the matter.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that sanction was obtained from the learned Magistrate for the investigation in the matter and therefore, it is not hit by Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. also.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed in part and the offence under Section 353 IPC incorporated in the final report and in the case before the court below, is quashed. As far as practicable, the court below shall grant exemption to the petitioner from personal appearance.
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
