Kerala High Court
K.K.Reghunathan vs State Of Kerala on 4 July, 2025
2025:KER:48893
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 7523 OF 2024
PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED:
T.M.UNNIKRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI,
AGED 50 YEARS,
S/O.VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI, THEKKUMPARAMBATHU MANA,
KAVUVATTOM, CHERPULASSERY P.O, PALAKKAD - 679 503
BY ADVS.
SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN
SRI.SREEJITH SREENATH
SMT.RINCY KHADER
SMT.K.V.RAJESWARI
SMT.SUSHAMA DEVI M.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 THE VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU
PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
PIN - 678001
3 ARUN KUMAR V.V.,
S/O.ACHUKUTTA WARRIER, CHIRANKARA WARRIAM, KAVUVATTOM,
CHERUPULASSERY P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 679503
R1 & R2 BY SRI.RAJESH A., SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, VACB
SMT.REKHA.S., SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, VACB
R3 BY ADV.SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.06.2025
ALONG WITH CRL.MC.10540/2024 AND CRL.M.C.929/2025, THE COURT ON
04.07.2025,PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:48893
THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10540 OF 2024
CRIME NO.3/2024 OF VACB, PALAKKAD, Palakkad
PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:
DEVI DASAN,
AGED 71 YEARS,
S/O.APPUKUTTAN ERADI, ILLARAKOVILAKAM HEREDITARY
TRUSTEE OF SREE CHERPULASSERY DEVASWOM
CHERPULASSERY, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
PIN - 679503
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
SHRI.ADARSH MOHAN K.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, G B ROAD
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PALAKKAD POLICE STATION, TOWN NORTH, BIG BAZAR,
CITY POST, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678004
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:48893
*ADDL.R4 ARUNKUMAR V.V.,
S/O.ACHUTHA WARRIER, CHIRANKARA VARYAM,
KARUVATTAM,CHERUPPULLASSERY P.O., PALAKKAD,
PIN - 679203
IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO:4 AS PER
ORDER DATED 3.3.2025 IN CRL.M.A.1/2025 IN CRL.M.C.
10540/2024
R1 TO R3 BY SMT.REKHA.S.,SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, VACB
SRI.RAJESH A., SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
VACB
ADDL.R4 BY ADVS.
SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)
SRI.ROHITH C.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC.CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
24.06.2025 ALONG WITH CRL.MC.929/2025,CRL.MC.7523/2024, THE
COURT ON 04.07.2025 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:48893
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 929 OF 2025
CRIME NO.3/2024 OF VACB, PALAKKAD
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1, 3 AND 5:
1 K.K.REGHUNATHAN,
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O.PADMINI AMMA, RESIDING AT VRINDAVANAM HOUSE,
NEAR SREE PARIYANAMPATTA BHAGAVATHI KSHETHRAM,
KATTUKULAM P.O., MANGALAMKUNNU, OTTAPPALAM,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679503
2 C.RADHAKRISHNAN,
AGED 69 YEARS,
S/O.LATE C PANKUNNY, NON HEREDITARY TRUSTEE,
AYYAPPANKAVU DEVASWOM, CHERUPLASSERY, PALAKKAD
RESIDING AT CHANGARATTIL HOUSE, CHERUPLASSERY,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679503
3 E.M.VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI,
AGED 60 YEARS,
S/O.LATE PARAMESWARAN NAMBOOIRI, CLERK, SREE
AYYAPPANKAVU DEVASWOM, CHERUPLASSERY, PALAKKAD
DISTRICT RESIDING AT MOOTHEDATH MANA, TOOTHA P.O,
AANAMANGADU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679357
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
SRI.H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:48893
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, G B ROAD
PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PALAKKAD POLICE STATION, TOWN NORTH,BIG BAZAR,CITY
POST, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678004
*ADDL.R4 ARUNKUMAR V.V.,
S/O.ACHUTHA WARRIER, CHIRANKARA VARYAM KARUVATTAM
CHERUPPULLASSERY P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN-679203.
IS IMPLEADED AS 4TH ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT AS PER
THE ORDER DATED 03/03/2025 IN CRL.M.A.NO.2/2025 IN
CRL.M.C.NO.929/2025
R1 TO R3 BY SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH.A.
VACB
SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REKHA.S., VACB
ADDL.R4 BY ADVS.SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)
SRI.ROHITH C.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
24.6.2025, ALONG WITH CRL.MC.NO.10540/2024 AND CRL.MC NO.
7523/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:48893
CR
COMMON ORDER
Dated this the 4th day of July, 2025
These Criminal Miscellaneous Cases have been filed by
accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 seeking quashment of FIR in Crime
No.3/2024 of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Palakkad and
FIR in V.C.No.3/2024/PKD of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption
Bureau, Palakkad, registered alleging commission of offences
punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(a) r/w Section 13(2) of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by the Prevention
of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 (for short, 'the PC Act, 2018'
hereinafter) as well as under Sections 406, 408, 420, 468, 471 and
120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC' hereinafter), by
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:48893
the petitioners.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant and the
learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the legal provisions
and the decisions cited.
3. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the
petitioners is that none of the offences under the PC Act, 2018
would attract the present case, since none of the petitioners herein
are public servants within the meaning of Section 2(c)(i) to (xii) of
the PC Act, 2018.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners stressed the
definition of 'public servant' under Section 2(c)(xii) which provides
that any person who is an office-bearer or an employee of an
educational, scientific, social, cultural or other institution, in
whatever manner established, receiving or having received any
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 8 2025:KER:48893
financial assistance from the Central Government or any State
Government, or local or other public authority. The learned
counsel for the petitioners would submit that in the instant case,
Sree Ayyappan Kavu Temple, Cherupulassery is under the Malabar
Devaswom Board governed by the provisions of the Madras Hindu
Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 and Rules (for
short, 'the Act, 1951' hereinafter) thereof and therefore, the
administration of the temple is under the control of the
Commissioner and any discrepancies or malpractices, in any form,
can vehemently addressed by the Commissioner and the
Commissioner has power to deal with the situation. It is also
pointed out that the Hereditary Trustee, the Melsanthi and the
other petitioners who are arrayed as accused being the Managing
Trustee, the Non-Hereditary Trustee and the Head Clerk also do
not come within the purview of the definition 'public servant'
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 9 2025:KER:48893
under Section 2(c) of the provisions of the PC Act, 2018. The
learned counsel pointed out Section 45 of the Act, 1951 to emphasis
his argument regarding the powers of the Commissioner and
pointed out that the Commissioner has wide power to address
illegalities, if any, by appropriate means. Section 45 of the Act,
1951 reads as under:
45. Power to suspend, remove or dismiss
trustees.- (1) The Deputy Commissioner in the case of any
religious institution over which an Area Committee has
jurisdiction, and the Commissioner in the case of any other
religious institution, may suspend, remove or dismiss any
hereditary or non-hereditary trustee or trustees thereof-
(a) for persistent default in the submission of
budgets, accounts, reports or returns, or
(b) for wilful disobedience of any lawful order
issued under the provisions of this Act by the
State Government, the Commissioner or
Deputy Commissioner, the Area Committee
or the Assistant Commissioner, or
(c) for any malfeasance, misfeasance, breach of
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 10 2025:KER:48893
trust or neglect of duty in respect of the trust,
or
(d) for any misappropriation of, or improper
dealing with, the properties of the institution,
or
(e) for unsoundness of mind or other mental or
physical defect or infirmity which unfits him
for discharging the functions of the trustee.
(2) When it is proposed to take action under sub-section
(1), the Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner, as the case
may be, shall frame charges against the trustee concerned and give
him an opportunity of meeting such charges, of testing the
evidence in his favour; and the order of suspension, removal or
dismissal shall state the charges framed against the trustee, his
explanation and the finding on each charge with the reasons
therefor:
Provided that the Deputy Commissioner shall also
consult the Area Committee before passing the final order under
sub-section (1).
(3) Pending the disposal of the charges framed against the
trustee, the Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner may place
the trustee under suspension and appoint a fit person to discharge
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 11 2025:KER:48893
the functions of the trustee.
(4) It shall be open to an Assistant Commissioner to
move the Deputy Commissioner to take action under sub-section
(1) in respect of any trustee of an institution over which an Area
Committee has jurisdiction, and to place the trustee under
suspension pending the orders of the Deputy Commissioner under
sub-section (3).
(5) A trustee who is suspended, removed or dismissed
under sub-section (1) may, within one month from the date of
the receipt of the order of suspension, removal or dismissal,
appeal against the order to the Commissioner if it was passed by
a Deputy Commissioner, and to the State Government if it was
passed by the Commissioner.
5. Zealously opposing the contention raised by the
petitioners disputing their status as that of public servants, the
learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant taken this
Court's attention to the definition of 'public servant' as per Section
2(c)(viii) where it is provided that any person who holds an office
by virtue of which he is authorised or required to perform any
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 12 2025:KER:48893
public duty is a public servant. He also pointed out that as per
Section 2(b) of the PC Act, 2018, 'public duty' means a duty in the
discharge of which the State, the public or the community at large
has an interest. He also brought attention of this Court to
Explanation 1 to Section 2 of the PC Act, 2018 by asserting that
persons falling under any of the above sub-clauses are public
servants, whether appointed by the Government or not. In support
of his contention, he has placed Division Bench decision of this
Court in Satheesh v. Enquiry Commissioner And Special
Judge reported in [2003 KHC 1143] wherein this Court
considered the definition of public servant when considering
whether Commissioner of Guruvayoor Devaswom as well as the
Administrator of the Guruvayoor Devaswom are persons who hold
the respective officers and in that capacity are public servants
within the meaning of Section 2(c)(viii) of the PC Act, 2018. While
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 13 2025:KER:48893
answering the said question, this Court in paragraph No.10 held
that the Commissioner, the Administrator and the members of the
managing committee are public servants, as defined in Section 2(c)
(viii) of the PC Act, 2018.
6. Countering this argument, the learned counsel for the
petitioners would submit that the appointment of Commissioner
and Administrator in Guruvayoor Devaswom is governed by the
Guruvayoor Devaswom Act, 1978 where it has been specifically
provided that the appointment to the said post shall be from a
Government servant. Therefore, the said decision has no
application in the present crime.
7. Apart from the decision in Satheesh's case
(supra), the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant
placed a three bench decision of the Apex Court in State of
Gujarat v. Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Shah reported in [2020
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 14 2025:KER:48893
KHC 6358] where also the Apex Court considered the definition
of 'public servant' under Section 2(c) of the PC Act, 2018, when
considering the officers under a deemed University within the
purview of public servant. The learned counsel read out paragraph
Nos.22, 26, 29, 34, 46, 60 and 68 of the above judgment to contend
that in view of the ratio laid in Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Shah's
case (supra), the petitioners herein, who are deemed public
servants as that of a temple under the Malabar Devaswom Board,
are public servants.
8. The learned Public Prosecutor supported the argument
of the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant and
pressed for dismissal of these petitions permitting the investigation
based on the FIRs already registered to have its logical conclusion,
as per law. The learned Public Prosecutor also placed a decision of
this Court in W.P.(Crl.)No.791/2022, where this Court addressed
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 15 2025:KER:48893
the definition of the word 'public servant' in relation to an
educational institution managed by a society registered under The
Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies
Registration Act, 1955. In the said decision, in paragraph No.13,
this Court found that the duty discharge to them is public duty,
hence, they are public servants under the PC Act, 2018.
9. In the instant case, Sree Ayyappan Kavu Temple,
Cherupulassery is under the Malabar Devaswom Board governed
by the provisions of the Act, 1951. Therefore, while considering the
question as to whether the petitioners herein are public servants,
the essentials under Section 2(c)(xii) of the PC Act, 2018, is
relevant. Section 2(c)(xii) of the PC Act, 2018, an employee of the
temple also would become a public servant if the temple is
receiving or having received any financial assistance from the
Central Government or any State Government, or local or other
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 16 2025:KER:48893
public authority. In fact, as already pointed out, the petitioners
herein are the Managing Trustee, the Hereditary Trustee, the Non-
Hereditary Trustee, the Melsanthi as well as the Head Clerk and
they are getting salary from the fund of the temple or the fund of
the Malabar Devaswom Board. If there is some materials to show
that there is payment of any financial assistance from the Central
Government or any State Government or local or public authority
to the temple, the petitioners would definitely come within the
purview of 'public servants'. Since no materials available to see
payment of any financial assistance from the Central Government
or any State Government or local or public authority, it could not
be held that the petitioners herein are public servants within the
meaning of Section 2(c)(xii) of the PC Act, 2018. If such a wide
definition is given, then, even the employees of private temples and
charitable associations, which do not receive any financial
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 17 2025:KER:48893
assistance from any Government or public authority would come
within the purview of the PC Act, 2018 and the same is never
intended by the legislature, while enacting the PC Act, 2018.
10. Coming to Cr.M.C.No.7523/2024, it is discernible that
the petitioner therein is the 4 th accused, who is the Melsanthi of the
temple. Going by the prosecution allegations also, he did not have
any role in the administration of the temple and his duty is to obey
the directions of the temple committee. It is discernible from the
report of the inspection submitted by the Inspector, Malabar
Devaswom Board as on 12.9.2024, produced as Annexure R4(c) in
Crl.M.C.No.929/2025, that the allegation against the Melsanthi is
that the Melsanthi kept some gold ornaments belonged to the
deity, in his possession and failed to give the same to the trustees.
In Annexure R4(c), the Inspector found that the said item was
handed over to the Devaswom and the trustee received as receipt
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 18 2025:KER:48893
No.139, dated 6.2.2022. In fact, in the said scenario, no offence
would lie against the Melsanthi. It is true that there is allegation
regarding falsification of records, use of the same as genuine and
carrying out construction without the sanction etc., are found in
Annexure R4(c) report also, for which, investigation is required.
11. Since none of the offences under the PC Act, 2018 would
attract in the facts of this case, as against the petitioners, the
prosecution as against them for the said offences would not lie and
the same would require quashment. However, as far as the IPC
offences in relation to the petitioners in Crl.M.C.Nos.929 of 2025
and 10540 of 2024 are concerned, the investigation is liable to be
continued by transferring the FIR to the local limit of the Police
Station where crime was committed.
In the result, Crl.M.C.No.7523 of 2024 stands allowed. The
FIR as against the petitioner therein, who is arrayed as the 4 th
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 19 2025:KER:48893
accused, in its entirety, is quashed.
Crl.M.C.Nos.929 of 2025 and 10540 of 2024 are allowed in
part. Thereby, offences under the PC Act, 2018, alleged against the
petitioners herein, as per the impugned FIR, stand quashed with
direction to the Investigating Officer to hand over the FIR and
connected records to the Station House Officer of the Police Station
where the crime was committed to continue the investigation as
regards to the other offences under the IPC, as per law, to have a
logical conclusion of the same.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
Bb
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 20 2025:KER:48893
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN V.C.NO.3/2024 OF
VACB, PALAKKAD DATED 12-04-2024
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVILEGE CARD ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER BY THE GURUVAYUR DEVASOM
Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED BY
THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD WHICH
DISCLOSES THAT THE PETITIONER HAD BEEN
THE MELSANTHI OF SREE SABRAIMALA DEVASWOM
FROM 16-11-2016 TO 15-11-2017
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 24-01-2023
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08-01-
2024 IN W.P.(CRL) NO.1273 OF 2023
Annexure 6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION WHICH
PRESCRIBES THE QUALIFICATION ISSUED BY
THE GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM FOR THE PERIOD
FROM 01-10-2024, DATED 1-8-2024
Annexure 7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26-06-2024
Annexure 8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 05-07-
2024 IN W.P.(C)NO.11875 OF 2024
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE- R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED AT THE
INSTANCE OF THE PETITIONER TO THE SREE
AYAPPANKAVAU DEVASWOM MANAGING TRUSTEE,
DATED 16.03.24.
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 21 2025:KER:48893
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10540/2024
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.
A2/1310/2000(I) DATED 07.12.2000 OF THE
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HR & CE DEPARTMENT
ALONG WITH RETYPED COPY
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY PROCEEDINGS NO.A1/2279/2005
DATED 20.06.2006 OF THE DEPUTY
COMMISSIONER ALONG WITH RETYPED COPY
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.J5-
2014/2024-MDB(KDIS) OF THE COMMISSIONER,
DATED 9-10-2024
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT
PETITION(CRL)1273/2023 OF THIS HONOURABLE
COURT DATED 08.01.2024
Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.3/2024
OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU,
PALAKKAD
Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN
CRL.M.C.NO.7523/2024 DATED 9-9-2024 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT
Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
25.11.2024 IN CRL.M.C.7523/2024 OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 22 2025:KER:48893
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.A2/4910/2019/MDB DATED 31-3-2020 OF
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER.
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY PROCEEDINGS NO.J5/3336/
2021/MDB(K.DIS) DATED 19-3-2022
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17-11-1994
OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT
PETITION(CRL)1273/2023 DATED: 8.1.2024
Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.3/2024
OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU,
PALAKKAD DATED 12-4-2024
Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN CRL.
M.C.NO.7523/2024 DATED 9-9-2024 OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT
Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
25.11.2024 IN CRL.M.C.7523/2024
Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11-12-2024
IN CRL.M.A.1/2024 IN CRL.M.C.10540/2024
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE- R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM
BOARD, AS ORDER NO.J5/4302/2023/M.D.B
DATED 23.11.23.
ANNEXURE- R4(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
HON'BLE COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM
BOARD, AS ORDER NO.J5/168/2024/M.D.B
DATED 13.03.24.
CRL.M.C.NO.7523 OF 2024,
CRL.M.C.NO.10540 OF 2024 &
CRL.M.C.NO.929 OF 2025 23 2025:KER:48893
ANNEXURE- R4(C) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY THE
INSPECTOR, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD,
OTTAPALAM DIVISION, BEFORE THE ASSISTANT
COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD,
PALAKKAD, DATED 12.09.24.
