Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MANU.K.VARGHESE, MANAGER, ICICI BANK versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


MANU.K.VARGHESE, MANAGER, ICICI BANK v. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY - Crl MC No. 2191 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 15414 (10 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2191 of 2007()

1. MANU.K.VARGHESE, MANAGER, ICICI BANK
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. BABU V.R., SHIVASMITHI, KAVARADI ROAD,

For Petitioner :SRI.KKM.SHERIF

For Respondent :SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :10/08/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

Crl.M.C.No.2191 of 2007

Dated this the 10th day of August 2007

O R D E R

The petitioner is the first accused in crime No.25/2007 of Karamana police station registered under Section 395 I.P.C. According to the petitioner, he is the Manager of the ICICI Bank and that no crime whatsoever has been committed by him in having re-possessed the vehicle in terms of the agreement between the parties. After the F.I.R was registered, the petitioner came before this court and filed this Criminal Miscellaneous Case to quash the F.I.R. The Criminal Miscellaneous Case was admitted on 9/7/2007. An interim direction was issued that the final report shall not be filed till 23/7/2007, the next date of posting. While the Criminal Miscellaneous Case was pending and the said interim direction was remaining in force, it is now reported that, in violation of the interim direction, final report was filed by the investigating officer on 14/7/2007. In such final report, it was alleged that the petitioner had committed the offence punishable under Sections Crl.M.C.No.2191/07 2 294b, 323 and 385 I.P.C. On such final report filed by the police, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance also, it is submitted. The case is now pending before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram as C.C.No.870/2007. Notice has been served on the de facto complainant/third respondent herein. The third respondent has also entered appearance. The petitioner has now got the Criminal Miscellaneous Case amended to seek a further relief of quashing C.C.No.870/2007.

2. There has been yet another change in circumstances. The third respondent and the petitioner have reported before this court that the disputes between them have been settled and the third respondent does not want to further prosecute the matter.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the course adopted by the police is not justified and deserves to be frowned upon. By the improper conduct of filing the final report, ignoring the interim order dated 09/07/2007, very valuable right of the petitioner has been infringed. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that it was an absolutely inadvertent and unintentional action on the part of the investigating officer Crl.M.C.No.2191/07 3 and the investigating officer's indiscretion may be condoned. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the third respondent pray and the learned Public Prosecutor endorses that request that proceedings initiated against the petitioner may now be quashed.

4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the prayer of the petitioner, as conceded by the third respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor can be allowed.

5. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is in these circumstances allowed. The F.I.R in crime No.25/2007 of Karamana police station, the final report submitted after investigation in that crime as also C.C.No.870/07 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram on the basis of such final report are all hereby quashed.

6. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is thus allowed.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.M.C.No.2191/07 4 Crl.M.C.No.2191/07 5

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.