FR. THOMAS MANIANKERIKALAM . vs THOMAS J. PADIYATH . — Crl.A. No. 55/2004

Case under Section II-D. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010067902003

Filing Date

28-Mar-2003

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 55/2004

Diary Number

6790/2003

Order Date

20-Apr-2005

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Section II-D

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.FR. THOMAS MANIANKERIKALAM .

    Adv. HIMINDER LAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THOMAS J. PADIYATH .

    Adv. K. R. SASIPRABHU

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-Apr-2005

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 12-Jan-2004

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 04-Aug-2003

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 02-May-2003

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 28-Mar-2003

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 55/2004

View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 2004 Outcome: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the prosecution of appellants Fr. Thomas Maniankerikalam and another under Section 500 IPC. The Court found that the complaint was not validly filed under Section 199(1) CrPC because the complainant, who was residing in Dubai, was not justified in authorizing a Power of Attorney holder to file the complaint—Dubai residence did not fall within the statutory exceptions permitting surrogate complaints. Next Steps: Liberty granted to the complainant to file a fresh complaint in accordance with law. The period from the original complaint's filing date until this judgment (April 20, 2005) shall be excluded when calculating the limitation period for the fresh complaint. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case