Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GOPALAKRISHNAN S/O. ANANDAKRISHNAN versus FR.CHACKO, KANJOOPARAMBIL SDB

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


GOPALAKRISHNAN S/O. ANANDAKRISHNAN v. FR.CHACKO, KANJOOPARAMBIL SDB - Crl MC No. 747 of 2004 [2007] RD-KL 350 (5 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 747 of 2004()

1. GOPALAKRISHNAN S/O. ANANDAKRISHNAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. FR.CHACKO, KANJOOPARAMBIL SDB,
... Respondent

2. KERALA STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE

For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAVU

For Respondent :SRI.JOE JOSEPH KOCHIKUNNEL

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :05/01/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

Crl.M.C.No.747 of 2004

Dated this the 5th day of January 2007

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioner with a request to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the criminal complaint filed against him by the respondent herein. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 465 and 420 I.P.C against the petitioner on the basis of the private complaint filed by the complainant. A copy of the complaint is produced as Annexure A1. The sworn statement of the complainant is produced as Annexure 2.

2. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that he induced the complainant to part with an amount of Rs.33,00,000/- in June 2003. The amount was made available as price for marine engines which the petitioner agreed to supply to the respondent/complainant. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner did not make available the marine engines, as promised. It was realised that he was not a distributor of M/s.Suzuki Motor Corporation as represented by him. The complainant was convinced that the purpose of the petitioner Crl.M.C.No.747/04 2 was to make false representations solely with the intention of inducing him to part with money. The cheques issued were dishonoured. The amount was not paid. A blank cover was sent to inform the complainant that a demand draft for the amount was being sent along with that. All these cumulatively convinced the complainant that the petitioner's intention right from the beginning was only to defraud and deceive the complainant and to induce him to part with money. It is, in these circumstances,that the complaint was filed.

3. The prayer of the petitioner is that the proceedings may be quashed by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It cannot be held that the allegations, if accepted, do not reveal the offences punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. In these circumstances, in any view of the matter, I am satisfied that this petition is without any merit and deserves to be dismissed. There is no representation for the petitioner or the respondent when the matter came up for hearing. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr Crl.M.C.No.747/04 3 Crl.M.C.No.747/04 4

R.BASANT, J

C.R.R.P.No.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF JULY 2006


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.