A.N Bhaskaran vs Martin V.P
2021 Latest Caselaw 8883 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                   PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                        Crl.MC.No.3363 OF 2016(A)

   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 21/2016 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF
                JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR


PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:

             A.N BHASKARAN, S/O NARAYANAN, SECRETARY, THRISSUR
             TALUK CO-OPERATIVE COLLEGE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY LTD.
             NO.R 728, KALLINGAL LANE, THRISSUR. (RESIDING AT
             EDATHEDATHU HOUSE, AVINISSERY P.O.,
             THRISSUR - 680 313)

             BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT, 2ND ACCUSED & STATE:

      1      MARTIN V.P, S/O PAUL V.P., VEERALI HOUSE, PONNUKKARA
             P.O., THRISSUR - 680 306

      2      P. RAMACHANDRAN,
             SENIOR INSPECTOR, CRP SECTION, OFFICE OF THE JOINT
             REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
             THRISSUR - 680 003. (RESIDING AT PUTHUR HOUSE, KANNTH
             LANE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR).

      3      STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC INSPECTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI - 682 031

             R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.K.D.BABU(KOTTACKAL)
             R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.K.D.BABUKOTTACKAL
             R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.A.C.DEVY
             R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.K.R.RAMISH

             PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.E.C.BINEESH

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD            ON
17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.MC.No.3363 OF 2016(A)            2




                              ORDER

Cognizance taken on a protest complaint

alleging offence under Section 420, 465, 120 B r/w

Section 34 IPC is challenged by accused No.1 on the

reason that there is failure on the part of the

Magistrate to consider and appreciate the refer

report submitted by the Police. It is not at all

necessary to go into each and every aspect of the

referred charge while entertaining a protest

complaint and taking cognizance. The mere fact

that the Police has investigated the crime and

submitted a referred charge may not be a sufficient

reason to reject the cognizance taken on a protest

complaint. Hence, Crl.M.C. fails, dismissed.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

JUDGE

msp

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE -I A TRUE COPY OF THE INEIRM ODER DATED 04-04-

2013 IN WP(C)NO.8189 OF 2013

ANNEXURE- II A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23-07-

2014 IN WP(C)NO.8189 OF 2013.

ANNEXURE-III CERTIFIED COPY OF HE COMPLAINT (CMP 8880/2013) DATED 06-11-2013, FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR.

ANNEXURE-IV CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR IN CMP 8880/2013 IN CC 21/2016

ANNEXURE-V A TRUE COPY O THE COMPLAINT DATED 16-04-

2012M FILED BYT THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRISSUR

ANNEXURE-VI A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 16-04-

2012, ISSUED FROM THGE OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THRISSUR.

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES:NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE