High Court Kerala High Court

Binu Lal.T vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
Binu Lal.T vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4219 of 2010()


1. BINU LAL.T,S/O.THANKAPPAN,T.C.22/210,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE DIRECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,FORT

4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.M.STEPHEN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :10/12/2010

 O R D E R
             M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
            --------------------------
              Crl.M.C.No.4219 of 2010
            --------------------------

                       ORDER

Petitioner, the fifteenth accused, in Crime No.

178/2009 of Pozhiyoor Police Station, filed this

petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal

Procedure to quash Annexure-A6 final report and for

a direction to the first respondent to file a

report on further investigation under Section 173

(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure, based on

Annexure-A7 representation submitted by him.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

3. Argument of the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner is that in Annexure-A6 final

report, prosecution case is that out of the stolen

gold ornaments, a part was entrusted to the fourth

accused, who, in turn, entrusted it to the

petitioner and the mahazar prepared while effecting

recovery of those articles reveals that petitioner

CRMC 4219/10 2

was unaware of the fact that they are stolen

articles and in such circumstances, an offence

under Section 411 of Indian Penal Code is not

attracted.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that

based on Annexure-A7 representation, first

respondent directed further investigation and a

report has already been submitted before the court

seeking permission to investigate the case under

Section 173(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure and

now, the case is being investigated by Deputy

superintendent of Police.

5. In such circumstances, I do not find it

necessary to quash the final report as the aspects

raised by the petitioner are matters, to be looked

into at the time of investigation. Petitioner is

entitled to challenge the final report submitted

under Section 173(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Petition is dismissed.

10th December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv