Chithra Mathew vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 28, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1452440

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/1452440
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Feb 28, 2022
Case Number: OP(Crl.)/72/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Chithra Mathew

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the first informationstatement of the victim as well as the materials collected during investigation would disclose that an offence under section 354 of ipc is involved. however, the charge sheet was filed by the police for the offences under sections 294(b), 509, 506(1), 341, 354(a)(iv) r/w 34 of ipc. the court below mechanically took cognizance of those offences, it is alleged.3. it is up to the court to frame charge after perusing allthe records and after hearing both sides. at the time of framing charge, the court can very well consider whether the offence op(crl.) no. 72 of 2022 3 under section 354 of ipc is involved. needless to say, the court can at any time alter the charge also. accordingly, this original petition (crl) is disposed of with a direction that the court below shall consider at the time of framing charge whether the offence under section 354 of ipc is attracted or not. needless to say, if the offence under section 354 of ipc is attracted, the court below shall frame charge for the said offence. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge ab op(crl.) no. 72 of 2022 4 appendix of op(crl.) 72/2022 petitioner exhibits exhibit1 a true copy of the statement given by the petitioner before the civil police officer dated 05/08/2019 exhibit2 a true copy of the final report in crime no. 808/2019 of vallikkunnam police station. respondents exhibits : nil

Full Judgment

OP(CRL.) NO. 72 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1943 OP(CRL.) NO. 72 OF 2022 IN CC 16/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS I, KAYAMKULAM PETITIONER; CHITHRA MATHEW, AGED 41 YEARS W/O.RAJU, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, KAYAMKULAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690106 BY ADVS. JOHN K.GEORGE M.A.PRABHU RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 BABU, AGED 56 YEARS KOCHUPLAVILA THEKKETHIL HOUSE, KATTANAM VILLAGE, VALLIKKUNNAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN - 690501 3 ACHANKUNJU, AGED 67 YEARS S/O.GEORGE, KOCHUPLAVILA THEKKETHIL HOUSE, KATTANAM VILLAGE, VALLIKKUNNAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690501 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.P.PRASANTH THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(CRL.) NO. 72 OF 2022 2

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is the de facto complainant in Crime No.808/2019 of Vallikkunnam Police Station is aggrieved by non inclusion of Section 354 of IPC while taking cognizance of the crime by the court below.

2. According to the petitioner, the first information

statement of the victim as well as the materials collected during investigation would disclose that an offence under Section 354 of IPC is involved. However, the charge sheet was filed by the police for the offences under Sections 294(b), 509, 506(1), 341, 354(A)(iv) r/w 34 of IPC. The court below mechanically took cognizance of those offences, it is alleged.

3. It is up to the court to frame charge after perusing all

the records and after hearing both sides. At the time of framing charge, the court can very well consider whether the offence OP(CRL.) NO. 72 OF 2022 3 under Section 354 of IPC is involved. Needless to say, the court can at any time alter the charge also. Accordingly, this Original Petition (Crl) is disposed of with a direction that the court below shall consider at the time of framing charge whether the offence under Section 354 of IPC is attracted or not. Needless to say, if the offence under Section 354 of IPC is attracted, the court below shall frame charge for the said offence. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE ab OP(CRL.) NO. 72 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 72/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit1 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CIVIL POLICE OFFICER DATED 05/08/2019 Exhibit2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 808/2019 OF VALLIKKUNNAM POLICE STATION. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Chithra Mathew vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath

Public prosecutor Police officer Police Station At any time First class high court As well as