Ramdas v. State

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 7586 of 2015 () --------------------------- CMP. NO.2369/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KASARAGOD.

CRIME NO. 649/2015 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION. ........

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

--------------------------------------- RAMDAS, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.MADHAV, RESIDING AT GARGANDURU GARGANDURU VILLAGE AND POST, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT, KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY HIS SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER RAJESH, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.SOPALA NAIK, R/AT B.H. HOUSE, KORUVAILU, KUDLU VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR.

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

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

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

2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, (CRIME NO.649/2015 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION), KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD, PIN: 671 121.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE.

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

Crl.MC.No. 7586 of 2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE A I:

A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE.

ANNEXURE A II:

A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING THE PAYMENT. ANNEXURE A III:

A TRUE COPY OF THE KACHIT ISSUED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KASARAGOD.

ANNEXURE A IV:

A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 451 OF CR.P.C.

ANNEXURE A V:

A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD.

ANNEXURE A VI:

A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/11/2015 IN C.M.P NO.2369/2015 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I, KASARAGOD.

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Crl.M.C. No.7586 of 2015 C ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 15th day of December, 2015

O R D E R

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

2.

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the vehicle in question is not involved in the commission of the offence alleged against the accused. The petitioner is a third party. Therefore, condition No.2 in Annexure-AVI order can be lifted.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and condition No.2 in Annexure-AVI order is lifted.

Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/15/12 // True Copy // PA to Judge