Allowed

Sreekumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Nov 2010Crl.MC/4160/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Kerala High Court quashed criminal prosecution involving seven accused under various IPC sections including mischief and criminal trespass. The court held that since disputes were settled amicably between petitioners and respondents, continuing prosecution was contrary to interest of justice citing Madan Mohan Abbot.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Misc. Case No. 328/2007 on file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara is quashed.

Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4160 of 2010()

¶6

-----------------------------------C.C.NO.328/2007 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, NEYYATTINKARA.

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

----------------------------------

¶9

1. SREEKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.APPU, SREEMANCHARI VEEDU, ATHIYANNUR, RAMAPURAM.

¶10

2. ANILKUMAR, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.APPUKUTTAN PANICKER.

¶11

3. VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.CHELLAPPAN, AVANAKKUZHI MANALUVILA VADAKKETHATTU P.C. NIVAS.

¶12

4. SIVARAJAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.KUTTAN, MANALUVILA VEEDU, NEAR MANALUVILA JUNCTION, ATHIYANNUR.

¶13

5. VELAPPAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.SADANANDAN, MANALUVILA MEKKETHATTU.

¶14

6. SANALKUMAR, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.APPUKKUTTAN PANICKER, NEAR MANALUVILA JUNCTION, ATHIYANNUR.

¶15

7. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.SADANANDAN, MANALUVILA MEKKETHATTU.

¶16

8. KUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.SADANANDA PANICER, PANAVILA KIZHAKKARUKATHU VEEDU, NEAR AVANAKKUZY MANALUVILA JUNCTION.

¶17

9. RAJAN, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.KUTTAN, MANALUVILA VEEDU, NEAR AVANAKKUZY MANALUVILA JUNCTION.

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 4160 of 2010

¶19

10. MURUKAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.SIVANANDAN, PONGUVILA VEEDU, NEAR AVANAKKUZY MANALUVILA JUNCTION.

¶20

11. SUDEVAN, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.VELUKKUTTY PANICKER, MANALUVILA MELETHATTU VEEDU, NEAR AVANAKKUZY ANALUVILA JUNCTION.

¶21

12. ASHOKAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.SUKUMARA PANICKER, AVANAKUZHI KATTUTHARISHU VADAKKARIKU ATHIYANNUR.

¶22

13. THULASEEDHARAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.SOMAN, THOTTATHARISU VADAKKARIKU VEEDU, ATHIYANNUR.

¶23

14. VIJAYAN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.APPU, KARUKINKODU PATTUKUZHI, ATHIYANNUR.

¶24

BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN

¶25

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:

¶26

-------------------------------------------------

¶27

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED VIA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶28

2. BEENAKUMARI, D/O.PONNAMMA, MANALUVILA VEEDU, AVANAKUZHI, ATHIYANNUR VILLAGE.

¶29

*ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED

¶30

ADDL. R3: PONNAMMA L., D/O.LAKSHMI, MANALUVILA VEEDU, AVANAKUZHI, THANNIMOODU, ATHIYANNOOR VILLAGE.

¶31

*ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23/11/2010 IN CRL.MA.6960/2010.

¶32

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.I.V. PRAMOD. R2 BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED.

¶33

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

¶35

M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.

¶36

Crl.M.C.No.4160 of 2010

¶37

ORDER

¶38

Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.328/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Neyyattinkara, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 447, 427 and 506 (i) read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Neyyattinkara Police Station. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contenting that entire disputes

¶39

with respondents 2 and 3, the injured defacto complainant and the person who was intimidated, were settled amicably and in view of the

¶40

settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.

¶41

Respondents 2 and 3 appeared through a

¶42

counsel and filed separate affidavits stating that

¶43

they have settled all the disputes amicably with

¶44

CRMC 4160/10 2

¶45

the petitioners and in view of the settlement, they have no objection for quashing the proceedings to maintain the cordial relationship between them.

¶46

petitioners, respondents 2 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶47

prosecution case is that with the common object of constructing a way through the property of the first respondent, petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on 18.11.2006 at about 6.45 a.m. and in furtherance of the common object, trespassed into the property and cut and removed two trees causing a loss of Rs.250/- and also intimidated the third respondent and thereby committed the offences. Offences alleged are purely personal in nature against respondents 2 and 3. As

¶48

held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v.

¶49

State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), when the offences are purely personal in nature and

¶50

CRMC 4160/10 3

¶51

respondents have settled all the disputes amicably with the petitioners, as is clear from their affidavits, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, especially when consequent to the settlement, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution.

¶52

Petition is allowed. C.C.No.328/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Neyyattinkara is quashed.

¶53

23^rd November, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv

Sreekumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala & Another

Siddique Vs State of Kerala and Another

Sathi Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Surendran Vs Devi

Thulasidharan Vs State of Kerala

Thankappan Nair Vs State of Kerala