Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 15705 Ker
Judgement Date : 6 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 4170 OF 2023
CRIME NO.51/2012 OF GURUVAYOOR POLICE STATION, TRISSUR
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2023 IN CRL.MP NO.1117/2023 IN CC
NO.730 OF 2012 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS ,CHAVAKKAD
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1:
RAJESH VIJAYAN AGED 53 YEARS S/O. VIJAYAN,
INDIRA GANDHI ROAD, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673016
BY ADVS. JAGAN ABRAHAM M.GEORGE JAISON ANTONY
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 AND 4:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.,
PIN - 682031
2 ROY VIJAYAN AGED 55 YEARS S/O. VIJAYAN, PRASANNA,
INDIRA GANDHI ROAD, KOZHIKODE.,
PIN - 673016
3 RANI VENUGOPAL AGED 62 YEARS W/O. VENUGOPAL,
THANDASSERY HOUSE,CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR-,
PIN - 680005
SR PP RENJIT GEORGE
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
06.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.R.P.No.4170 of 2023
2
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.4170 of 2023
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2024
ORDER
This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C' for short) and the prayers are as
under:-
To quash the Annexure A3 order dated 05.04.2023 in Criminal
Miscellaneous Petition No.1117/2023 in CC No.730/2012 on the file
of the Honourable Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavakkad
and to remove the case from the special list.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed the
order in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.1611/2021 against the
order/judgment in CC No.1806/2015 of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate, Kalamassery. The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure
A3 order, whereby the learned Magistrate received documents filed
by the prosecution in addition to the documents form part of the
final report.
4. The 1st accused/petitioner opposed the same contending
that such documents could not be received in advance. On perusal
of the documents received by the Court, it could be seen that the
same are certified copies of proceedings before the Family Court, in
between the same parties.
5. There is no bar for the prosecution to place additional
documents apart from the documents referred in the final report, if
the said documents are also necessary to prove the prosecution
case0, after serving copies of the same to the other side. However,
admissibility and tendering of the documents in evidence shall be as
per the prosecution case. As far as the order impugned is
concerned, the learned Magistrate only accepted the documents and
the tendering of documents in evidence is yet to come in, since the
trial not yet started. Therefore, while confirming Annexure A3
order, it is specifically ordered that tendering and marking of the
documents in evidence shall be as per the procedure established by
law.
Accordingly, the above petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE
RPR/-
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION NUMBERED AS CRL.M.P.NO.1117/2023 DATED 09-03-2023 Annexure-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 15-03-2023 IN THE ABOVE CRL.M.P.NO.1117/2023 Annexure-A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05-04-2023 IN CRL.MP.NO.1117/2023 IN C.C.NO.730/2012
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!