Kerala High Court
Arshad.P.K vs Shoshamma Shaji on 26 October, 2015
Author: B. Kemal Pasha
Bench: B.Kemal Pasha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA
THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/27TH PHALGUNA, 1937
Crl.MC.No. 542 of 2016 ()
--------------------------
CRL.MP 11498/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,THIRUVALLA.
CRIME NO. 1471/2015 OF PULIKEEZHU POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA.
............
PETITIONER/CLAIM PETITIONER:
-----------------------------------------------
ARSHAD.P.K, S/O.MOIDU,
PATHAYAKKODAN HOUSE, PALLIKKAL,
ELLUMANNAM PO, WAYANAD-670 645.
BY ADV. SRI.N.J.MATHEWS
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
-------------------------------------------------------------
1. SHOSHAMMA SHAJI,
VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERINGARA MURI,
THIRUVALLA.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PULIKEEZHU POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031.
R1 BY ADVS. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP
SRI.P.K.SATHEES KUMAR
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
Crl.MC.No. 542 of 2016 ()
----------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
-----------------------------------------
ANNEXURE 1 : PHOTOCOPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED BY
RTO, MANANTHAVADY FOR THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KL 27 B
2047.
ANNEXURE 2 : CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR NO.1471/2015 OF PULIKEEZHU
POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 3 : CERTIFIED COPY OF CRL.M.P.NO.11665/2015 ON THE FILES OF
JFMC, THIRUVALLA.
ANNEXURE 4 : CERTIFIED COPY OF CRL.M.P.NO.11498/2015 ON THE FILES OF
JFMC, THIRUVALLA.
ANNEXURE 5 : CERTIFIED COPY OF REPORT DT 8-12-15 SUBMITTED BY
2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JFMC, THIRUVALLA.
ANNEXURE 6 : CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DT 21-12-2015 PASSED BY JFMC,
THIRUVALLA.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES & EXHIBITS:
--------------------------------------------------------------
EXT. R1(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION PARTICULARS ISSUED BY THE
JT.R.T.O.THIRUVALLA.
EXT. R1(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 26.10.2015.
EXT. R1(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 27.10.2015.
EXT. R1(D) : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 29.10.2015.
EXT. R1(E) : TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 30.10.2015.
EXT. R1(F) : TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PASSPORT OF THE
PETITIONER'S HUSBAND.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
mbr/
B. KEMAL PASHA, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Crl.M.C. No.542 of 2016
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 17th day of March, 2016
O R D E R
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Annexure-6 order passed by the court below under Section 451 Cr.P.C. is under challenge. The subject matter of the case is a Maruti WagonR car bearing registration No.KL-27B-2047. The said car is the subject matter in Crime No.1471/2015 of Pulikeezhu Police Station. Through Annexure-6 order, the court below has ordered the release of the car to the interim custody of the 1st respondent, who is the de facto complainant, under Section 451 Cr.P.C. The petitioner herein is the present registered owner of the car as per records.
Crl.M.C.542/2016 : 2 :
2. The accused in the aforesaid crime is one Alan Philip, who is none other than the nephew of the husband of the 1st respondent herein. The husband of the 1st respondent, who was the original RC owner of the vehicle, is abroad. The 1st respondent has filed Crl.M.P. No.11498/2015 before the court below seeking the interim custody of the vehicle under Section 451 Cr.P.C., on the strength of the Power of Attorney executed by her husband in her favour. The present petitioner also had filed Crl.M.P. No.11665/2015 before the court below seeking the interim custody of the car. The said petition filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed by the court below and the petition filed by the 1st respondent was allowed.
3. The prosecution case is that the registered owner of the car namely, Shaji Scaria, who is the husband of the 1st respondent herein, had permitted his nephew, the aforesaid Alan Philip, for using the car for the purpose of taking the age old parents of the 1st respondent to hospitals and other Crl.M.C.542/2016 : 3 : places. He used to drive the car for the said purposes. While so, on 26.10.2015, the said Alan Philip took the car from the house of the aged parents of the 1st respondent, by representing that he wanted to take the sister of one of his friends to a hospital at Ernakulam. Thereafter, he had never returned the car. On enquiry, it was revealed that he had handed over the car to the petitioner and the petitioner got it registered illegally in his name, without the knowledge and consent of the original registered owner.
4. According to the petitioner herein, the petitioner purchased the car and got it registered in his name, and that the registration of the crime is a cat and mouse game played between the 1st respondent and her husband with the aid of Alan Philip.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and learned Public Prosecutor.
6. Annexure-R1(a) is the copy of the registration Crl.M.C.542/2016 : 4 : particulars of the vehicle, which shows that the car was originally registered in the name of Shaji Scaria on 07.02.2011. The 1st respondent has procured certified copies of the documents produced by the petitioner herein before the court below for forwarding his claim under Section 451 Cr.P.C. over the car. Annexure-R1(b) is the copy of the sale note dated 26.10.2015 by which one Alan Cherian, son of Cherian Philip, has sold the vehicle to one Anas. Through Annexure-R1(b), the sale of the car of Shaji Scaria was allegedly made by Alan Cherian, S/o.Cherian Philip(none other than Alan Philip).
7. Annexure-R1(c) is the copy of the sale note dated 27.10.2015 executed by Anas in favour of one Haris for the sale of the very same car. Annexure-R1(c) is executed on the very next day of the execution of Annexure-R1(b). Annexure-R1(d) is another sale agreement in respect of the very same car on 29.10.2015, i.e., just two days after the execution of Annexure-R1(c), by Haris in favour of one Crl.M.C.542/2016 : 5 : Nazar K.T. in respect of the very same car. Annexure-R1(e) is the sale note dated 30.10.2015 in respect of the very same car executed by Nazar K.T. in favour of the present petitioner. Annexure-R1(e) is the sale note by which the petitioner claims title over the said car.
8. According to the petitioner, the car was purchased by him through legal means from its then owner and got it registered and, therefore, he is the person who is entitled to claim interim custody of the vehicle under Section 451 Cr.P.C.
9. The case of the 1st respondent is that the car that was being used by her age old parents was taken away by Alan Philip with a false representation and thereafter, he had not cared to return the car. When she came to know that the car was handed over by Alan Philip to the present petitioner, she preferred the complaint before the police. Consequently, the crime was registered for the offence under Section 420 IPC.
Crl.M.C.542/2016 : 6 :
10. Even though the petitioner claims that he purchased the car from one Nazar K.T. on 30.10.2015 only, Annexure-A1 RC book procured by the petitioner in respect of the car, shows that the car was registered in his favour with effect from 26.10.2015. Even though he has a case that he purchased the car based on Annexure-R1(e) on 30.10.2015 only, as per Annexure-1, the car was registered in his name with effect from 26.10.2015. It seems that on 26.10.2015, a sale note was cooked up by Alan Philip and one Anas, the copy of which is Annexure-R1(b). It is evident that the originals of Annexures-R1(b), R1(c) and R1(d) were cooked up in order to show that the petitioner had validly purchased the car from a third party. On 26.10.2015 itself, the car was got registered in the name of the present petitioner. No doubt, the other persons named Anas, Haris and Nazar K.T. even if in existence, are name lenders of the present petitioner. Those sale notes were cooked up to create false evidence. Presently, Alan Philip is the only Crl.M.C.542/2016 : 7 : accused in the case. At the same time, it seems that others are also part of a conspiracy and they are also liable to be proceeded against in the matter.
11. The court below has considered the entire aspects in its correct perspective and has passed Annexure-6 order, which does not call for any interference at all. There is absolutely no illegality, irregularity or impropriety in Annexure-6 order. Matters being so, this Crl.M.C. is devoid of merits and is only to be dismissed, and I do so.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
Sd/-
(B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE) aks/17/03 // True Copy // PA to Judge