Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Sentence Cannot Be Reduced to Two Months for Four Life-Threatening Stab Wounds: Supreme Court Restores 3-Year RI in Attempt to Murder Case Suspicion, However Grave, Cannot Substitute Proof: Apex Court Reaffirms Limits of Section 106 IEA Accused at the Time of the Statement Was Not in the Custody of the Police - Discovery Statement Held Inadmissible Under Section 27: Supreme Court Failure to Explain What Happened After ‘Last Seen Together’ Becomes an Additional Link: Supreme Court Strengthens Section 106 Evidence Act Doctrine Suicide in a Pact Is Conditional Upon Mutual Participation — Survivor’s Resolve Reinforces the Act: Supreme Court Affirms Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Participation in Draw Does Not Cure Illegality: Supreme Court Rejects Estoppel in Arbitrary Flat Allotment Case Nepotism and Self-Aggrandizement Are Anathema to a Democratic System: Supreme Court Quashes Allotment of Super Deluxe Flats by Government Employees’ Welfare Society Liberty Is Not Absolute When It Becomes a Threat to Society: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Alleged ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Mastermind Magistrate’s Power Is Limited — Sessions Court May Yet Try the Case: Supreme Court Corrects High Court’s Misconception in ₹6.5 Crore Fraud Bail Order Dacoity Cannot Be Presumed, It Must Be Proved: Allahabad High Court Acquits Villagers After 43 Years, Citing ‘Glaring Lapses’ in Prosecution Case When the Judge Signs with the Prosecutor, Justice Is Already Compromised: MP High Court Quashes Tainted Medical College Enquiry Strict Rules Of Evidence Do Not Apply To Proceedings Before The Family Court: Kerala High Court Upholds Wife’s Claim For Gold And Money Commission Workers Cannot Claim Status of Civil Servants: Gujarat High Court Declines Regularization of Physically Challenged Case-Paper Operators Non-Wearing of Helmet Had a Direct Nexus with Fatal Head Injuries  : Madras High Court Upholds 25% Contributory Negligence for Helmet Violation Only a ‘Person Aggrieved’ Can Prosecute Defamation – Political Party Must Be Properly Represented: Karnataka High Court Quashes Case Against Rahul Gandhi

A Notarised Affidavit Subsequently Signed by the De Facto Complainants Cannot Be Taken in Isolation – Discharge Application Dismissed – Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, under the jurisdiction of Honorable Mr. Justice N. Nagares, dismissed a Criminal Revision Petition, stating that notarized affidavits from complainants can't be considered in isolation for discharging an accused from the case.

The case, numbered CRL.REV.PET No. 678 of 2023, was filed by the 3rd accused, Vishnu K.B, seeking revision of the order in CRL.M.P.66/2023 in SC 704/2022 from the Assistant Sessions Judge, Chavakkad, Thrissur.

Justice N. Nagares noted that the de facto complainants have no objection in discharging the petitioner from the case. However, he also mentioned that, "In this case, on the basis of materials made available by the prosecution, the Assistant Sessions Judge has found that there is reason to proceed against the accused. A notarised affidavit subsequently signed by the de facto complainants cannot be taken in isolation by the Court so as to discharge the accused" (Para 16).

The petitioner was accused under various sections of the Indian Penal Code including Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 308, and 149. He had argued that the de facto complainants themselves have given intimation to the police that he was not involved, a point that the court found insufficient for his discharge.

The judge cited precedents set by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ghulam Hassan Beigh v. Mohammad Maqbool Magrey, Asim Shariff v. NIA, State of Karnataka v. M.R.Hiremath and State of Tamil Nadu v. Suresh Rajan, stating the roles and responsibilities of the court while considering a discharge application (Para 12-15).

The Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Petition but acknowledged that the petitioner is aspiring for a job in the public sector and directed the lower court to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible to avoid causing prejudice to the petitioner.

Date of Decision: 4th September 2023

VISHNU K.B vs STATE OF KERALA

Latest Legal News