IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3348 of 2011() ------------------------- CC.206/2011 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KOLENCHERRY .................... PETITIONER(S)/IST ACCUSED IN C.C.NO.206/2011 :- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ THOMAS SEBASTIAN, AGED 35, S/O.SEBASTIAN MATTAMMEL HOUSE, THRIKKAKKARA P.O., KOCHI - 21. BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE SRI.ADEEP ANWAR SMT.RENJINI RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/INVESTIGATING OFFICER & CW1 :- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION, PUTHENCRUZ – 686 321. 3. WILSON K.C, S/O.CHUMMAR K.T., KUTHOOR HOUSE, CHOWANNUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT – 670 003. ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH FOR R3 SMT.THANUJA ROSHAN FOR R3 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt CRL.M.C.3348 OF 2011 APPENDIX Petitioner's Exhibits :- Annexure 1 :- Copy of the private complaint before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kolencherry. Annexure 2 :- Copy of the First Information Report issued by Puthencruz Police Station. Annexure 3 :- Copy of the charge sheet submitted by the police before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kolencherry. Annexure 4 :- Copy of the additional statement given by the 3rd respondent. Annexure 5 :- Copy of the correction deed as document No.4055/2010 on 20.9.2010. Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL. //True Copy// P.A. to Judge N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.3348 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of December 2011 O R D E R The de facto complainant who is the 3rd respondent herein is represented by his counsel. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the 3rd respondent would submit that subsequently a document, Annexure-5 was executed by the petitioner correcting the extent actually conveyed to the Vendee as per that document. In such circumstance, I find that proceedings pursuant to Annexure- 3 charge sheet is only to be quashed. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Proceedings against this petitioner pursuant to Annexure-3 charge sheet is quashed. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Jvt