Skip to content
Try for free
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.
See full guide →

Sathyadevan vs Gopalan

Sathyadevan vs Gopalan

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided May 24, 2023
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1345547

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.Rev.Pet/1099/2004

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sathyadevan

Respondent

Gopalan

Excerpt

.....(pp) this criminal revision petition having come up for admission on 24.05.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following:bechu kurian thomas, j.======================== crl r.p. no.1099 of 2004 ------------------------------------------------ dated this the 24th day of may 2023orderrevision petitioner is the complainant in crl.m.p.no.12800/2003 on the files of the judicial first class magistrate court-iii, punalur. the complaint filed alleging offences under sections 427, 447, 506(i) r/w section 34 of the indian penal code, 1860 was dismissed by the learned magistrateunder section 203 of the cr.p.c. after coming to the conclusionthat the matter primarily falls within the realm of a civil dispute.2. aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint under section 203 cr.p.c. this revision petition has been preferred.3. i have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned public prosecutor.4. the complaint and three witness were examined bythe learned magistrate. a reading of the complaint produced as annexure a in this revision petition reveals that the dispute is basically with regard to the possession of a property. it is a settled law that the attempt on the part of the complainant to convert a pure civil dispute to a criminal case must be discouraged. in the instant case, the complaint was filed in 2003 and the same was dismissed on 18.12.2003 by the impugnedorder. almost 20 years have elapsed since the impugned orderwas passed and no purpose would be achieved by further directing the complaint to be taken back on file and to be proceeded with. having regard to the entire circumstances, there is no merit in this criminal revision petition and same is dismissed. sd/ bechu kurian thomas judge jm/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCRMP 12800/2003 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III, PUNALUR REVISION PETITIONER/S: SATHYADEVAN THADATHIL VEEDU, VILAKKUVETTAM, VALACODE VILLAGE. BY ADV SRI.C.C.THOMAS (SR.) RESPONDENT/S: 1 GOPALAN VILAKKUVETTAM, VALACODE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2 KANCHANVALLY W/O. GOPALAN DO. DO. 3 SUBHASHITHAN S/O. GOPALAN DO. DO. 4 SANTHOSH S/O. GOPALAN DO. DO. 5 SUNIL S/O. GOPALAN DO. DO. 6 VINOD S/O. GOPALAN DO. DO. 7 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI.BIJU GEORGE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.REJI MATHEW KAVALAYIL SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN (PP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

======================== Crl R.P. No.1099 of 2004 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of May 2023

ORDER

Revision petitioner is the complainant in Crl.M.P.No.12800/2003 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Punalur. The complaint filed alleging offences under Sections 427, 447, 506(i) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was dismissed by the learned Magistrate

under Section 203 of the Cr.P.C. after coming to the conclusion

that the matter primarily falls within the realm of a civil dispute.

2. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. this revision petition has been preferred.

3. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The complaint and three witness were examined by

the learned Magistrate. A reading of the complaint produced as Annexure A in this revision petition reveals that the dispute is basically with regard to the possession of a property. It is a settled law that the attempt on the part of the complainant to convert a pure civil dispute to a criminal case must be discouraged. In the instant case, the complaint was filed in 2003 and the same was dismissed on 18.12.2003 by the impugned

order. Almost 20 years have elapsed since the impugned order

was passed and no purpose would be achieved by further directing the complaint to be taken back on file and to be proceeded with. Having regard to the entire circumstances, there is no merit in this Criminal Revision petition and same is dismissed. sd/ BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jm/

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2023 Same Parties Sathyadevan vs Gopalan Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales