Vinod Kumar v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/7TH PHALGUNA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 3880 of 2014 () --------------------------- CRIME NO. 696/2014 OF PALAKKAD TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

------------------------------------------------------

1. VINOD KUMAR MANAGER, JANAKHSEMA MARUTI CHIT FUNDS, NEAR FORT MAIDAN PALAKKAD.

2. SUSEEL KUMAR PROPRIETOR, JANAKSHEMA MARUTI CHIT FUNDS NEAR FORT MAIDAN, PALAKKAD.

BY ADVS.SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SMT.PREETHI KESAVAN SRI.T.C.KRISHNA SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR SMT.ASHA K.SHENOY SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S)/STDATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682 031.

2. R.KRISHNAN S/O.C.V.RAJAN, CHILAMBATH, PATTATHALACHI VADAVANNUR, PALAKKAD - 678 504.

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE. P THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 3880 of 2014 () --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNEXURE-1: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 14.5.2014 ANNEXURE-2: TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 14.5.2014 ANNEXURE-3: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 15.5.2014 ANNEXURE-4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF BAIL DATED 15.5.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER ANNEXURE-5: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 15.5.2014 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE sab

P.UBAID, J.

------------------------- Crl. M.C No.3880 of 2014 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of February, 2015.

O R D E R

The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 696 of 2014 of the Palakkad Town South Police Station. The prayer in this proceeding is to quash the FIR in the crime. Pending the proceedings it was reported that investigation is in fact over, and the police has submitted final report in court. The petitioners were directed to take necessary steps to incorporate proper prayer. Such steps are not seen taken. In such a situation this Crl.M.C is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to seek appropriate relief as regards the final report in the crime. P.UBAID, JUDGE sab