Krishnadas vs Jaleel
2021 Latest Caselaw 10163 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

    THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                      Crl.MC.No.3647 OF 2020(E)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1217/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                 OF FIRST CLASS ,VADAKKANCHERRY


PETITIONER:

               KRISHNADAS,
               AGED 49 YEARS
               S/O. SANKARANKUTTY,
               PANKANPURAKKAL VEETTIL,
               VELLANIKKARA,
               VILLAGE DESOM,
               THRISSUR.

               BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

RESPONDENTS:

      1        JALEEL
               AGED 49 YEARS
               S/O. MOIDEENKUTTY,
               ARANGATHUPARAMBIL VEEDU,
               OTTUPARA DESOM,
               KUMARANELLUR,
               PALAKKAD 679 552.

      2        STATE OF KERALA,
               REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
               HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ,
               ERNAKULAM 682 031.



               SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.MC.No.3647 OF 2020(E)

                                       2




                                   ORDER

Dated this the 25th day of March 2021

The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C. No.1217 of 2015

on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate No.1,

Wadakkancherry. The case originated from Crime No.358 of

2005 registered at the Wadakkancherry Police Station for the

offence under Section 420 of IPC.

2. The petitioner is alleged to have cheated the defacto

complainant and others by deceiving them into joining the chitty

conducted by one 'Panjajanyam Finance Corporation', of which

the petitioner is alleged to be the Managing Director.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that,

even going by the documents produced by the prosecution, the

petitioner has only the Manager of the firm and not Managing

Director. That, the Financial Institution or its actual Managing

Director have not been arrayed as accused, the proceedings are

liable to be quashed. Consideration of contention call for

appreciation of evidence, which the High Court is not expected to, Crl.MC.No.3647 OF 2020(E)

while exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Moreover, petitioner has the efficacious remedy of filing an

application for discharge before the trial court.

In the result, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed reserving the

petitioner's liberty to move an application for discharge by the

trial court.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE AJ Crl.MC.No.3647 OF 2020(E)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 468/2004 OF WADAKKANCHERY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR.

ANNEXURE B CERTIFIED COPY OF THE SEARCH LIST IN CRIME NO. 468/2004 OF WADAKKANCHERRY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR.