High Court allowed a writ petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that since the offences were purely personal and disputes were settled amicably by the injured party, continued prosecution was not in the interest of justice.
Criminal Case No. 397 of 2010 is quashed and proceedings are closed.
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 8TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1932
Crl.MC.No. 3989 of 2010()
----------------------------------(CRIME NO. 187/2010, CC.397/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, THAMARASSERY )
PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED:
---------------------------------------
1. K.K.MUJEEB, S/O.KADIRKUTTY, AGED 34 YEARS, KAYYELIKKUNNUMMEL, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. PIN-673001
2. C.P.MUHAMMED, S/O.ABOOBACKER HAJI, AGED 40 YEARS, CHORATHANIYIL HOUSE, KAKKAD P.O., PUTHUPPADY, CALICUT. PIN-673 001
BY ADV. SMT.BINDU GEORGE
RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN-682026.
2. M.K.KAMARUDEEN, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 33 YEARS, MUSARYKANDIYIL HOUSE, PUTHUPADDY, KOZHIKODE, PIN- 673001.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM R2 BY SMT.K.K.PREETHA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J
CRL.M.C..NO. 3989 OF 2010
DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF NOVEMBER,2010
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused and second respondent the defacto complainant, who is also the injured, in C.C.397 of 2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate -I, Thamarassery, taken cognizance for the offences under Section 341, 326, and 362 read with 34 IPC. Prosecution case is that on the midnight of 20.3.2010, at about 12.45 am, petitioners, in furtherance of their common intention, wrongfully restrained the second respondent after calling him from his house under the guise that some matter is to be discussed and thereafter hit on his hand with an iron rod and caused grievous hurt and wrongfully abducted him in a jeep and left him on the side of the road at a distance of 3 km away from his house and thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with the second respondent and consequent to settlement, it is not in the interest of
CRMC 3989/2010 2
justice to continue the prosecution. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that he has settled all the disputes with the petitioners and has no subsisting grievance against them and therefore he has no objection to close the proceedings as he has no intention to prosecute the matter further. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
CRMC 3989/2010
3
court.
First Class Magistrate -I, Thamarassery is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE
lgk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a complaint under Section 482 CrPC should be allowed to quash criminal proceedings where disputes have been settled amicably and the offences are purely personal in nature.
Whether continuing prosecution in the interest of justice is warranted when the injured party has no subsisting grievance against the accused.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Mohan Abbot V. State of PubjabRelied on¶26
Madan Mohan Abbot V. State of Pubjab (2008(2) KHC 589)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K.K.MUJEEB
C.P.MUHAMMED
STATE OF KERALA
M.K.KAMARUDEEN
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
