Allowed

Saji and Others v. Moly @ Susamma Joseph and Another

Kerala HC16 Nov 2010Crl.MC/4215/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings against petitioners accused of offences under Sections 354 and 323 IPC. The quashing was based on the amicable settlement between the accused and the injured party and the absence of prosecution intent, relying on Madan Mohan Abbot.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Misc. Case No.4215 of 2010 allowed; C.C.No.380 of 2009 quashed.

Saji and Others Vs Moly @ Susamma Joseph and Another — Cheating and Forgery | 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 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4215 of 2010()

¶6

------------------------------CC.380/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, THIRUVALLA IN CRIME NO.171/2009 OF KEEZHVAIPOOR POLICE STATION.

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3

¶8

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

¶9

1. SAJI,S/O.CHELLAPPAN, AGED 39 YEARS, KAILASAM HOUSE,MAILAMON, KUNNAMTHANAM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶10

2. DINI, W/O.SAJI, AGED 32 YEAS, KAILASAM HOUSE,MAILAMON, KUNNAMTHANAM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶11

3. OMANA, W/O.APPUKKUTTAN, AGED 65 YEARS, KAILASAM HOUSE,MAIAMON, KUNNAMTHANAM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TLAUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI.RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE

¶14

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

¶15

1. MOLY @ SUSAMMA JOSEPH, AGED 51 YEARS, W/O.JOSEPH,PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE,PUTHOOR MAILAMON, KUNNAMTHANAM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶16

2. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.

¶17

R1 BY ADV.SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

svs/

¶20

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶21

-------------------------------------------------------Crl.M.C No.4215 OF 2010

¶22

--------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 16^th day of November, 2010.

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.380 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Thiruvalla taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 451, 354, 506 (1) and 323 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-2 final report submitted by the Sub Inspector of police Keezhuvaipoor police station. Prosecution case is that on morning of 2.4.2009, in furtherance of their common intention, petitioners trespassed in the sit out of the house of first respondent and with the intention to outrage her modesty, caught hold of the nighty worn by the first respondent and accused kicked on her abdomen and threatened her when she fell down on the ground and thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with the first respondent and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.

¶25

First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that the entire disputes with the petitioners were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement she has no

¶26

Crl.M.C No.4215 OF 2010 2

¶27

intention to prosecute the case further and if the prosecution is continued it will jeopardize the cordial relationship with the petitioners and in such circumstances the case is to be quashed.

¶28

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶29

The final report establishes that offences alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature against the first respondent. The affidavit filed by first respondent establishes that she has settled entire the disputes with the petitioners. As held by Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, (2008 (3)KLT 19 SC)), when the offences alleged are purely personal in nature and entire disputes were settled between the accused and the injured, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.

¶30

Petition is allowed. C.C.No.380 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Thiruvalla, is quashed.

¶31

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.

¶32

mns

Saji and Others v. Moly @ Susamma Joseph and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saji and Others v. Moly @ Susamma Joseph and Another

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

Assistant Commissioner of Customs Vs State of Kerala and Another

Rajan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Noushad Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Sabeena Nadir Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Sageer Vs Shamna

Azad Vs State of Kerala