Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Baby Babu vs State Represented By Public Prosecutor on 4 June, 2012

Author: T.R. Ramachandran Nair

Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair

       

  

  

 
 
                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                           PRESENT:

                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

                    FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/5TH MAGHA 1934

                                             Crl.MC.No. 463 of 2013 (B)
                                                     -------------------------

                       (AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP.4626/2012 IN
           CRIME NO. 981/2012 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM)
                                       ............................................................



PETITIONER(S)/CLAIM PETITIONER :
---------------------------------------------------


                     BABY BABU, AGED 43 YEARS,
                     W/O.BABU, NEDUMKULANGARAMALA,
                     VEETTIL, ATHANI VILLAGE, KAKKANAD VILLAGE
                     ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

                     BY ADV. SMT.JEENA JOSEPH


RESPONDENTS(S)/RESPONDENTS :
----------------------------------------------------


                     STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                     HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
                     REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF POLICE,
                     PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION.


                     BY SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR




                     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
                     28-01-2013 ALONG WITH Crl.MC. NO.464/2013 AND CONNECTED CASES,
                     THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:


AMV

Crl.MC.No. 463 of 2013 (B)



                                      APPENDIX


PETITIONER(S) ANNEXURES :


ANNEX.A1      :      COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 04.06.2012.


ANNEX.A2      :      COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 01.08.2012.


ANNEX.A3      :      COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 09.06.2012.


ANNEX.A4      :      COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 09.08.2012.


ANNEX.A5.     :      COPY OF THE SEIZURE MAHAZAR DATED 09.08.2012.


ANNEX.A6      :      COPY OF ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE ON
                     26.11.2012 IN CRIME NO.981/2012.


ANNEX.A7      :      COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF
                     POLICE DATED 18.12.2012 BEFORE THE JFCM-1, ERNAKULAM.



RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES:             NIL




                                                /TRUE COPY/




                                                P.A.TO JUDGE




AMV




                T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
              ---------------------------------------
              Crl. M.C. Nos.463, 464, 484, 487
                        & 493 OF 2013
              ---------------------------------------
          Dated this the 28th day of January, 2013.


                           O R D E R

In all these cases, a common order passed by the learned Magistrate is under challenge. The petitioners herein contend that they are the owners and persons in possession of certain gold ornaments produced before the court by the investigating agency under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The offences alleged are under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The details of the gold ornaments are given in the memorandums itself.

2. According to the petitioners, the claim petitions have been considered by the court along with certain other petitions and the impugned orders have been passed. The petitioners contend that as they are the persons who are entitled to possess the gold ornaments, they are entitled for interim custody of the Crl.M.C.Nos.463/2013 & conn. cases 2 items separately claimed by them. Reliance is placed on the reports submitted by the investigating officer dated 18.12.2012, after the impugned orders have been passed. The respective Crime numbers are 971/12, 978/12, 979/12, 981/12 and 982/12.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. A perusal of the impugned order will show that the court has rejected the applications taking the view that there is absence of reliable material evidence revealing the legal right of the petitioners over the gold ornaments sought to be released. The petitioners had actually filed C.M.P.Nos.4626, 4489, 4574, 4494, 4673 of 2012. In Crl.M.C. No.463/2013, the further report filed by the investigating officer has been produced as Annexure A7 and in all other cases, the reports have been produced as Annexure A3. Evidently, the court had no occasion to consider the same.

Therefore, it is only proper that the matter is reconsidered by the court in accordance with law after hearing the parties Crl.M.C.Nos.463/2013 & conn. cases 3 concerned and any other necessary parties. For enabling the court to pass appropriate orders, the impugned orders will stand set aside. After hearing the parties concerned, fresh orders will be passed in the matter expeditiously.

These Crl. M.Cs are disposed of accordingly.

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp