Thyagarajan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 04, 2024

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1294333

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1294333
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas
Decided On: Jun 04, 2024
Case Number: Crl.MC/3411/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Thyagarajan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....to quash the said proceedings through this petition under section 482 cr.p.c.2. according to the prosecution, on 06.10.2018 at 10 a.m., accused 3 to 6had, on the instructions of the first and second accused, trespassed into the property of the de facto complainant and demolished the compound wall, causing a damage to the tune of rs.50,000/-, and thereby committed the offences punishable under sections 447 and 427 r/w section 34 of the indian penal code, 1860.3. sri.kodoth sridharan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submittedthat during the relevant time the petitioner was not in the country, as is evidenced by the endorsement in the passport, and further that section 34 of ipc requires the active participation of the accused with a prior meeting of minds. according to the learned counsel, none of those ingredients were present in the instant case, and therefore, prosecution against the petitioner ought to be quashed.4. smt.sreeja v., the learned public prosecutor, on the other hand,submitted that the plea of alibi taken by the petitioner is a matter which has to be considered during trial and even the question of active participation of the petitioner in the instant case and whether there was a prior meeting of minds between the accused are all factors which will have to be considered after evidence is adduced.5. the nature of allegations as evident from the final report indicate thatspecific overt acts are alleged against accused 3 to 6 while the petitioner and the second accused are alleged to have instructed the said accused to indulge in the criminal activity. as rightly pointed out by the learned public prosecutor, a plea of alibi, is a matter which will have to be established during trial as held in the decision in khalid v. state of kerala 2024 (2) khc 441, and therefore, the inherent jurisdiction under section 482 cr.p.c. cannot be invoked to quash the proceedings at this stage on the basis of the plea of alibi.6. even the question whether there.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1946 CRIME NO.315/2018 OF AMBALATHARA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.1546 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,HOSDRUG PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: THYAGARAJAN, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.KRISHNAN, RAVANESHAWARAM, PULLUR VILLAGE, AMBALATHARAM, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. KODOTH SREEDHARAN ARUN FRANCIS RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT : 1 STATE OF KERALA
THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER AMBALATHARA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031 2 A.X.SEBASTIAN S/O.A.V.XAVIER, EDOT HOUSE, PLANTHANAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, LALAM, PALA, PIN - 686 575. BY ADVS. DIVYA C BALAN P.D.SUBRAMANIAN NAMPOOTHIRI(K/34/1996) SREEJA V.(PP) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J ......…............................................. Crl.M.C.No.3411 of 2021 …................................................ Dated this the 4th day of June, 2024

ORDER

Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.1546/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg. Petitioner seeks to quash the said proceedings through this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

2. According to the prosecution, on 06.10.2018 at 10 a.m., accused 3 to 6

had, on the instructions of the first and second accused, trespassed into the property of the de facto complainant and demolished the compound wall, causing a damage to the tune of Rs.50,000/-, and thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 427 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. Sri.Kodoth Sridharan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted

that during the relevant time the petitioner was not in the country, as is evidenced by the endorsement in the passport, and further that Section 34 of IPC requires the active participation of the accused with a prior meeting of minds. According to the learned counsel, none of those ingredients were present in the instant case, and therefore, prosecution against the petitioner ought to be quashed.

4. Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand,

submitted that the plea of alibi taken by the petitioner is a matter which has to be considered during trial and even the question of active participation of the petitioner in the instant case and whether there was a prior meeting of minds between the accused are all factors which will have to be considered after evidence is adduced.

5. The nature of allegations as evident from the final report indicate that

specific overt acts are alleged against accused 3 to 6 while the petitioner and the second accused are alleged to have instructed the said accused to indulge in the criminal activity. As rightly pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, a plea of alibi, is a matter which will have to be established during trial as held in the decision in Khalid v. State of Kerala 2024 (2) KHC 441, and therefore, the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked to quash the proceedings at this stage on the basis of the plea of alibi.

6. Even the question whether there was any active participation and meeting of minds between the accused to rope in the petitioner as an accused, is a matter which can be considered only after trial.

7. The scope of interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C being very limited

and unless the uncontroverted allegations in the final report if taken on its face value does not make out any offence, can the remedy be invoked. Since the allegations in the final report, if uncontroverted make out the offences alleged, I find no merit in the Crl.M.C. and it is dismissed. sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AMV/05/06/2024 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3411/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED AMBALATHARA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD. ANNEXURE II TRUE COPYOF THE FIR DATED 7/10/2018 IN CRIME NO.315/18 OF AMBALATHARA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD. ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER TRUE COPY

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Thyagarajan vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas