The High Court quashed the FIR and proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the offences were personal, disputes between accused and complainants were settled amicably, and continuing prosecution was not in the interest of justice.
Crime No.587 of 2010 of Munambam Police Station is quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
MONDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2010 / 19TH ASWINA 1932
Crl.MC.No. 3842 of 2010()
PETITIONER(S):
---------------
1. KAMARUDHEEN, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, AGED 38 YEARS, THOPPILPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O., N.PARAVUR.
2. THOUFEEQUE, S/O.KABEER, AGED 30 YEARS, THOPPILPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O., N.PARAVUR.
3. SREEJITH, S/O.GOPI, MATHARUPARAMBIL, VANIYEKKADU, N.PARAVUR.
4. ANZAR, S/O.BASHEER, THOPPILPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O., N.PARAVUR.
5. ABBAS, S/O.MEERASA RAVUTHAR, THOPPILPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O., N.PARAVUR.
6. HARUDHEEN, S/O.ABDUL KADHAR, THOPPILPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O., N.PARAVUR.
BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.587/2010 OF MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM).
2. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O.DASAN, AGED 29 YEARS, VALIYATHARA, CHERAI KARA, PALLIPORT-683514.
3. SATHEESH, S/O.PUSHKARAN, AGED 31 YEARS, KUNNATHU VEEDU, MUAMBAM KARA, KUZHUPILLY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683514,
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
Crl.M.C No.3842 of 2010 -------------------------Dated this the 11th October, 2010
O R D E R
Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.587/2010 of Munambam Police Station registered under Annexure-I F.I.R for the offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 324, 308 r/w Section 149 I.P.C and Section 27 of Arms Act. Based on the statement of 2nd respondent, petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to quash the F.I.R and further proceedings contending that entire dispute with respondents 2 and 3 the de facto complainant and the injured were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement it is not necessary in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.
Crl.M.C No.3842 of 2010
2
respondents 2 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
Crl.M.C No.3842 of 2010
3
the offences alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature against respondents 2 and 3 and disputes were settled amicably by them with petitioners, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution as consequent to the settlement there no is likelihood of successful prosecution against the petitioners.
The petition is allowed. Crime No.587 of 2010 of Munambam Police Station is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
ma
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR and proceedings should be quashed in light of the settlement between the accused and the complainants.
Whether the offences charged are personal in nature and if the disputes were settled amicably.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶34
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC))
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kamarudheen
Thoufeeque
Sreejith
Anzar
Abbas
Harudheen
M.Sasidharan Nambiar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
