Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 144/2016 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (E&O),ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2: AABA FENILA, AGED 30 YEARS D/O VARGHESE T.G, THUNDATHIL HOUSE, NJARAKAL P.O.NJARAKAL VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-682 505. BY ADVS. M.REVIKRISHNAN Eldho K.C RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE: 1 SACHIN, AGED 34 YEARS S/O SHANAVAS, AASHIRVAD HOUSE, KUMBALAM VILLAGE, KUMBALAM KARA, REPRESENTING THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, M.G.ROAD, RAVIPURAM, PIN-682 016, AS ITS SENIOR RECOVERY OFFICER. 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. BY ADVS. SRI.C.P.SAJI SMT.P.DEEPA MOHAN SRI HRITHWIK CS, PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.6261 of 2019 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of December, 2023
ORDER
The petitioner is the 2nd accused in C.C. No. 144/2016 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Court, Ernakulam. The above case is charge sheeted alleging offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC.
2. The petitioner was the Director of the company
namely M/s. Blue Dot Construction Private Ltd. The company entered into an agreement with the 1st respondent for delivering an apartment in a multistoried building by name Surya Enclave after constructing the same. The company received consideration for the 1st respondent. But instead of delivering the apartment to the 1st respondent, the apartment was sold to a stranger. This is the crux of the prosecution case. The petitioner wants to quash the proceedings.
3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.
4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the connected cases were already quashed by this court as per order dated 26/02/2019 in Crl. M. C. No.
5. After going through those orders, it is clear that
the same set of facts are stated in this case also. I think the prosecution case is not maintainable in the light of the above order. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings in C. C. No. 144/2016 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam as against the petitioner are quashed. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE sms APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6261/2019 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 32 PERTAINING TO THE PETITIONER EVIDENCING THE FACT STATED AFORE ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO 144 OF
2016 PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (ECONOMIC OFFENCES), ERNAKULAM ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 5.8.2006 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PARENTS OF THE PETITIONER HEREIN ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.3.2006 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE EXTRA-
ORDINARY GENERAL MEETING OF THE COMPANY HELD
ON 27.3.2006 ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 9.12.2014 IN CRL.MA NO 11275 OF 2014 IN CRL.M.C NO 6938 OF 2014. ANNEXURE G TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.11.2016 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN CRL.MA.NO 12224 OF 2016 IN CRL.MC. NO 7911 OF 2016 ANNEXURE H TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 32 PERTAINING TO THE
PETITIONER,IN ITS ENTIRETY,EVIDENCING THE FACT THAT SHE WAS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY FROM 31.3.2006