M.K. Anil Kumar vs the State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecuto

M.K. Anil Kumar vs The State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecuto

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 03, 2023

~5 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1408535

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/1408535
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.
Decided On: Jan 03, 2023
Case Number: Crl.MC/9258/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M.K. Anil Kumar

Respondent

The State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecuto

Excerpt

.....an amount of rs.2,50,000/- using a cheque to m/s ssfuels. later, using the very same cheque, a further amount of rs.50 lakhs was withdrawn from the account of the firm in which the petitioners are partners. annexure a1 is the fir. later, the defacto complainant approached this court by filing w.p.(crl).no. was happening in the said crime. this court disposed of the said writ petition as per annexure a6 judgment by which it was directed that the deputy inspector general of police, who is the 2nd respondent herein, shall supervise the investigation that is being conducted by the station house officer of kannavam policestation. now the investigation is being conducted under the supervision of the 2nd respondent as ordered by this court. this crl. m.c is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash annexure a1 fir, and he has also put forward an alternate relief to direct the 2nd respondent, who is supervising the investigation, to verify all the cheques listed in annexure a8 representation submitted before him and after questioning the signatory named jasna. in the said representation, the petitioners also seek to send the cheques to handwriting experts.3. heard sri.abdul raoof pallipath, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and vipin narayan, the learned public prosecutor appearing for the state.4. as far as the prayer sought by the petitioner to quashthe fir is concerned, i am of the view that the same cannot be entertained because the investigation is now ongoing, and i do not find any justifiable reasons to interfere with the same. it is a well settled position of law that the interference at the stage of investigation, by invoking the powers of this court under section 482 cr.p.c is possible only in the rarest of rare cases where the allegation raised in the complaint does not make out any cognizable offence. on perusal of the records, i am of the view that this is not a case which falls under that category.5. however, with regard to the alternative.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. RD TUESDAY, THE 3 DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 13TH POUSHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 9258 OF 2022 PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO 1 AND 2: 1 M.K. ANIL KUMAR AGED 52 YEARS S/O M.K. RAMAN, RESIDING AT 'NANDANAM', EDAKKAD P.O,KANNUR PIN - 670663 2 K.C. MINEESH AGED 49 YEARS S/O M.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT MAVILAKANDY HOUSE, CHIRAKKAL.P.O, KANNUR PIN - 670011 BY ADVS. ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) E.MOHAMMED SHAFI PRAJIT RATNAKARAN GRACY POULOSE RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTO HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN - 682031 2 THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (KANNUR RANGE), OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM PIN - 670002 3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KANNAVAM POLICE STATION, KANNAVAM P.O,KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR PIN - 670643 4 M.M. THOMAS S/O JOSEPH, JOINT MANAGING DIRECTORM/S. MALABAR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS (P) LTD KOLAYAD, KANNUR PIN - 670657 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV VIPIN NARAYAN-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.216/2022 of Kannavam Police Station, which was registered based on a complaint submitted by the 4 th respondent herein alleging offences punishable under Sections 406, 468, 471, 420 and 120B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The allegation in the aforesaid complaint was that, in furtherance of their common intention, the accused persons had transferred an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- using a cheque to M/s SS

Fuels. Later, using the very same cheque, a further amount of Rs.50 lakhs was withdrawn from the account of the firm in which the petitioners are partners. Annexure A1 is the FIR. Later, the defacto complainant approached this Court by filing W.P.(Crl).No. was happening in the said crime. This Court disposed of the said writ petition as per Annexure A6 judgment by which it was directed that the Deputy Inspector General of Police, who is the 2nd respondent herein, shall supervise the investigation that is being conducted by the Station House Officer of Kannavam Police

Station. Now the investigation is being conducted under the supervision of the 2nd respondent as ordered by this Court. This Crl. M.C is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Annexure A1 FIR, and he has also put forward an alternate relief to direct the 2nd respondent, who is supervising the investigation, to verify all the cheques listed in Annexure A8 representation submitted before him and after questioning the signatory named Jasna. In the said representation, the petitioners also seek to send the cheques to handwriting experts.

3. Heard Sri.Abdul Raoof Pallipath, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Vipin Narayan, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

4. As far as the prayer sought by the petitioner to quash

the FIR is concerned, I am of the view that the same cannot be entertained because the investigation is now ongoing, and I do not find any justifiable reasons to interfere with the same. It is a well settled position of law that the interference at the stage of investigation, by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C is possible only in the rarest of rare cases where the allegation raised in the complaint does not make out any cognizable offence. On perusal of the records, I am of the view that this is not a case which falls under that category.

5. However, with regard to the alternative prayer sought for by the petitioner, it is seen that a representation submitted by the petitioner is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent,

wherein they have raised certain grievances. In such circumstances, it is only proper that, while the investigation in crime 216/2022 is being conducted under the supervision of the 2nd respondent, the grievances highlighted by the petitioner through Annexure-A8 representation shall also be taken into consideration and appropriate decision thereon shall be taken by the 2nd respondent. It is clarified that, I have not expressed any opinion as to the prayers sought for in Annexure A8 representation and contents thereof. It shall be open for the 2 nd respondent to conduct an investigation independently concerning the matter referred to in the said representation.

Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE rpk APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 9258/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO 216/22 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE MANAGER FEDERAL BANK, DATED 05.04.2022 WITH COPIES OF CHEQUES Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE CITIZEN COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO 510/2019 OF THE KANNAVAM POLICE STATION Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME 1546/2021 OF KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL MC NO. COURT, THALASSERY

Annexure A6        TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP (CRL) NO.
Annexure7          TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 7.10.2019
Annexure A8        TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED

9.12.2022 SEND BY EMAIL TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF EMAIL DATED 9.12.2022 Annexure10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 4.11.2019 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE REGIONAL HEAD, FEDERAL BANK Annexure A11 TRUE COPY OF THE SAVING BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF 1ST PETITIONER Annexure A12 TRUE COPY OF THE CASH CREDIT ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF 1ST PETITIONER Annexure A13 TRUE COPY OF THE CURRENT ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF MALABAR CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties M.K. Anil Kumar vs The State of Kerala Represented by Public ... Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.