Dani T.B v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/7TH ASWINA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 2760 of 2014 () --------------------------- CC.NO. 758/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- I,NORTH PARAVUR ----------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3:

--------------------------------------------- DANI T.B., AGED 34 YEARS,S/O.BABU T.P., THAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, MOOTHAKUNNAM VILLAGE, N.PARAVUR.

BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

---------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

(CRIME NO.720/2011 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT).

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

Crl.MC.No. 2760 of 2014 () -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:

-------------------------------------------- ANNEX-I:

TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ALONG WITH FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT IN CRIME NO.720/2011 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION.

ANNEX-II:

TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 18.8.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE POLICE.

ANNEX-III:

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE JFCM, NORTH PARAVUR, SUBMITTED BY THE POLICE. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:

NIL ------------------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Crl.M.C. No.2760 of 2014 C ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 29th day of September, 2015

O R D E R

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.720/2011 of Vadakkekara Police Station registered for an offence punishable under Section 20 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. According to the petitioner, he is falsely implicated in the crime only because of the fact that he is residing just near to the spot of incident. It is his further case that in the complaint, he has not been arraigned as an accused.

3.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

4.

It seems that in Annexure-III complaint, the

Crl.M.C.2760/2014 : 2 :

names of two accused are shown. It seems that the name of the petitioner is not included as an accused in the complaint. Matters being so, it has to be considered that the court below has not taken cognizance of any offence against the petitioner.

By recording the fact that the petitioner is not an accused in CC No.758/2011 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, North Paravur, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/29/09 // True Copy // PA to Judge