SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sreekanth vs State Of Kerala on 23 October, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 1ST KARTHIKA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.5389 OF 2015

CC NO.1148/2014 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PERAMBRA

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

SREEKANTH
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, VETTANKARANKANDI, NANMANDA,
KOZHIKODE

BY ADVS.
SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN
SHRI.K.NIRMALAN

RESPONDENT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM

ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED
ADDL.R2 SUNIL DUTT, NO.46/14,S/O SREEDHARAN NAIR
GOKULAM HOUSE, MITHALE VEETIL, VATTOLI BAZAR,
KOZHIKODE
IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER
DATED 17.01.2017 IN CRL.M.A. NO. 2028/2016 IN
CRL.M.C.5389/2015.

R1 SRI E C BINEESH-PP

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
09.10.2019, THE COURT ON 23.10.2019 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.5389 OF 2015

2

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, J
************************
Crl.M.C.No.5389 of 2015
———————————————–
Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2019

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) for quashing

Annexure-A2 final report filed against the petitioner in Crime

No.353/2014 of Balussery police station.

2. According to the prosecution case, the de facto complainant

was the Managing Director and the petitioner/accused was the

Director of the company by name “S.P.Vyshnava Chits Private Limited”.

It is alleged that the petitioner had removed from the company the

documents relating to the chitties and other financial transactions

conducted by the company and kept them by himself and thereby

committed the offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating

punishable under Sections 406 and 417 I.P.C.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and the learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the records.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, even if the
Crl.MC.No.5389 OF 2015

3

entire allegations against the petitioner in the final report are accepted

as true, the offences alleged against him are not attracted.

5. On a perusal of Annexure-A2 final report and the other

materials produced, it is doubtful whether the allegation raised against

the petitioner would attract the offence punishable under Section 417

I.P.C. However, it is not the position in respect of the offence

punishable under Section 406 I.P.C. A document is a “movable

property” within the meaning of Section 22 I.P.C (See Birla

Corporation Limited v. Adventz Investments and Holdings

Limited : AIR 2019 SC 2390). Therefore, documents can be the

subject matter of the offence of criminal breach of trust. Whether the

documents of the company were entrusted with the petitioner and

whether he had used those documents for his own benefit are matters

which cannot be decided in a petition under Section 482 of the Code.

A detailed discussion about the acceptability of the allegations or the

credibility of the materials collected by the investigating officer is not

warranted. Suffice it to say that, on an anxious consideration of all the

relevant inputs, I am not persuaded to invoke the power of this Court

under Section 482 of the Code in favour of the petitioner now. Learned

counsel for the petitioner submitted that charge against the petitioner

has not yet been framed by the court below. Then, it is a fit case in
Crl.MC.No.5389 OF 2015

4

which the petitioner must be relegated to invoke the ordinary

provisions of the Code to claim premature termination of the

proceedings against him.

6. In the result, the petition is dismissed. It is made clear that

this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of

the petitioner for discharge at the stage of Section 239 of the Code.

Sd/-R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE
jsr
Crl.MC.No.5389 OF 2015

5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE P1 ANNEXURE AI:CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR
NO.353/2014 OF BALUSSERY POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE P2 ANNEXURE A2:CETIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL
REPORT IN CC.NO.1148/2014 OF JFCM, ERAMBRA

ANNEXURE P3 ANNEXURE A3:CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REPORT
DT. 09.07.2014

ANNEXURE P4 ANNEXURE A4:TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.

08.03.2014

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

LSN

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation