Nabeesa vs Jemeela W/O Koya
2023 Latest Caselaw 5563 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
        TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MAY 2023 / 12TH VAISAKHA, 1945
                    CRL.REV.PET NO. 2941 OF 2004
  (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.07.2004 IN CC NO.95/1999 ON THE
FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-I, ALAPPUZHA)


PETITIONER/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:

            NABEESA, SARAS VILLA, NAVAROJIPURAYIDOM,
            LAJANATH WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

            BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
            SRI.GEORGE MATHEW


RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE:

    1       JEMEELA, W/O KOYA,
            NAVAROJIPURAYIDOM, LAJANATH WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

    2       KOYA, S/O.ALIKUNJU,
            NAVAROJIPURAYIDOM, LAJANATH WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

    3       RAHANA BEEVI, @ RAHUMATH,
            D/O.KHADEEJA, NAVAROJIPURAYIDOM,
            LAJANATH WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

    4       STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB- INSPECTOR OF
            POLICE, ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION,
            THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM.

            BY ADV.SMT.AMMINIKUTTY K., SR.PP
     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 02.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.REV.PET NO. 2941 OF 2004
                                    -2-

                               ORDER

This Revision Petition was filed by the

de facto complainant. The Judicial First Class

Magistrate's Court-I, Alappuzha, acquitted the

accused. Challenging the said acquittal, the

Revision Petition was preferred.

2. The subject matter of the complaint was

an Agreement for Sale. According to the de facto

complainant, the Agreement was fabricated and

forged.

3. A civil suit was instituted based on the

aforesaid Agreement and the Civil Court found

that the same was genuine. Accordingly,

acquitted the accused.

In the light of the fact that the Civil

Court has already found that the Agreement for

Sale was genuine, the Magistrate was justified

in acquitting the accused. I, therefore, find no

reason to interfere the matter. CRL.REV.PET NO. 2941 OF 2004

This Revision Petition fails and is

dismissed.

Sd/-

                                      A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
akv                                         JUDGE