Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    VINOD KUMAR v. STATE OF KERALA

    Crl.M.C. No.4394 of 2018

    1

    2024:KER:71385

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

    PRESENT

    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

    TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 2ND ASWINA, 1946

    CRL.MC NO. 4394 OF 2018

    CRIME NO.1427/2017 OF CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.106 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I,

    CHALAKUDY

    PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

    VINOD KUMAR

    AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR,

    MULLAPILLI HOUSE, CHIRAGHA DESOM, KORATTY,

    KIZHAKKUMURI VILLAGE -680 308.

    BY ADVS.

    SRI.T.B.GAFOOR

    SRI.A.E.ALIYAR

    SRI.M.I.ANWAR SADATH

    SRI.K.MOHAN

    RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

    1 STATE OF KERALA

    REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

    HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682 031.

    1

    2

    2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

    CHALAKUDI POLICE STATION,

    THRISSUR -680 307.

    BY ADV.:

    SRI.SANGEETHARAJ.N.R, PP

    THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY

    HEARD ON 24.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY

    PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

    3

    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

    -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4394 of 2018 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2024

    O R D E R

    The petitioner is an accused in CC No.106/2018 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudi. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioner alleging offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC.

    2. The gist of the prosecution case is that, on 22.11.2017, while the defacto complainant was waiting in a car near the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudi, for the purpose of taking bail in an offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC pending before the same court as CC No.1701/2017, the petitioner, who is the son of the deceased in the above case, manhandled the

    4

    defacto complainant by opening the car door and causing injury to the defacto complainant. Based on the complaint submitted by the defacto complainant, who is the accused in CC No.1701/2017, the above case is registered by the Chalakkudi Police as evident by Annexure-A2. Annexure-A3 is the Final Report. According to the petitioner, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out. Hence, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed.

    3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

    4. The petitioner is a practicing lawyer and his mother was died in an accident. According to the petitioner, there was no incident as alleged. It is further submitted that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, the offence under Section

    323 IPC is not made out. The petitioner produced

    5

    Annexure-A4 medical records to show that he is a heart patient.

    5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the contentions of the petitioner are to be proved before the trial court at the appropriate stage. This Court may not interfere with the prosecution.

    6. The offence alleged is under Section 323 IPC. Section 323 IPC says that, whoever voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punishable with imprisonment, either for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to One Thousand Rupees, or with both. 'Hurt' is defined in Section

    319 IPC. Section 319 of IPC says that, whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person is said to cause hurt.

    7. This Court perused Annexure-A1 complaint submitted by the defacto complainant.

    6

    Even though, the defacto complainant stated in the complaint that, because of the acts of the petitioner he sustained hurt, except the oral evidence of the petitioner to that effect, there is no medical evidence to support the case. Admittedly, the defacto complainant has not approached any Doctor for the alleged hurt of the petitioner. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that, the continuation of prosecution against the petitioner under Section 323 of IPC is an abuse of process of court.

    Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings in CC No.106/2018 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudi, arising from Crime No.1427/2017 of Chalakkudi Police Station are quashed.

    Sd/-

    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

    nvj JUDGE

    7

    APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4394/2018

    PETITIONER ANNEXURES

    ANNEXURE A1- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC NO.1701/17 FILED BEFORE THE

    JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE

    COURT, CHALAKKUDI, DATED

    22/11/2017.

    ANNEXURE A2- TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1427/17 OF CHALAKUDI POLICE STATION, DATED 01/12/2017.

    ANNEXURE A3- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1427/17 OF CHALAKUDI

    POLICE STATION IN CC NO.106/2018

    OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE

    COURT, CHALAKUDI, DATED

    28/12/2017.

    ANNEXURE A4- TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL DISCHARGE SUMMERY ISSUED BY ST.JAMES'

    HOSPITAL CHALAKKUDI DATED

    10/05/2017.

    RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

    //TRUE COPY//

    PA TO JUDGE

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    VINOD KUMAR v. STATE OF KERALA
    (Sep 24, 2024)