Allowed

C.K.Nabeesa v. Kabeer

Kerala HC26 May 2011Crl.MC/1522/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings against the accused who faced trial for offences including assault and obscene acts. The petitioners alleged a settlement of the personal dispute, evidenced by an affidavit, leading the court to allow the request and quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Miscellaneous Case allowed; proceedings against the first respondent/accused in C.C.No.26 of 2011 and final report in Crime No.532 of 2008 quashed.

C.K.Nabeesa Vs Kabeer — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2011 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1933

¶4

Crl.MC.No. 1522 of 2011() ------------------------CC.26/2011 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD ....................

¶5

PETITIONER(S): CW 1 TO 4:

¶6

------------------------------------------1. C.K. NABEESA, W/O. ABDULLA, AGED 39 YEARS, CHAYITHOTTAM HOUSE, MORGAL, PUTHOOR, KASARAGODE.

¶7

2. NAJITHA, D/O.C.M. ABDULLA, AGED 23 YEARS, RESIDING -DO-

¶8

3. NAFEETHA, D/O. ABDULLA, AGED 21 YEARS, RESIDING -DO-

¶9

4. C.ABDULLA, S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING -DO-

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED/STATE:

¶12

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

¶13

1. KABEER, S/O. LATE MUHAMMED,AGED 48 YEARS, CHAYITHOTTAM HOUSE, MORGAL, PUTHUR VILLAGE, KASARAGODE - 671 121.

¶14

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KASARAGODE - PIN - 671 121.

¶15

3. STATE, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

R1 BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS

¶17

R2& R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTORSRI. MANU

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Kss

¶20

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.1522 of 2011 -------------------------------------Dated this the 26^th day of May, 2011.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Public Prosecutor takes notice for respondents 2 and 3.

¶23

CWs 1 to 4 in Crime No.532 of 2008 of Kasaragod Police Station and C.C.No.26 of 2011 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasaragod are the petitioners before me, requesting to quash proceeding against the first respondent/first accused who is facing trial for offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 354 and 294(b) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended that the case against the second accused who faced trial in C.C.No.128 of 2009 ended in acquittal as per Annexure-I, judgment since witnesses did not support the prosecution case. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, first respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

Since first respondent was not available case against him was refiled as C.C.No.26 of 2011. Petitioners/CWs 1 to 4 say that they have settled the case with the first respondent. First petitioner has sworn an affidavit which is attested by learned counsel for petitioners where it is stated that the dispute is settled between them and first respondent and that they have no further grievance against the first respondent.

¶25

Crl.MC No.1522/2011

¶26

¶27

Since the dispute is purely personal to and between petitioners and first respondent and that the dispute is settled, I am inclined to allow the request.

¶28

Resultantly Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.532 of 2008 of Kasaragod Police Station to the extent it concerned first respondent/first accused, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against first respondent/first accused in C.C.No.26 of 2011 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasaragod are quashed.

¶29

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge.

¶30

cks

C.K.Nabeesa v. Kabeer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.K.Nabeesa v. Kabeer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Nishal Chandra Mohan Vs State of Kerala

M.O.Poulose Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Santha Joseph Vs State of Kerala and Another

K.S.Sanjeev & Another Vs Dr. K.S. Sheela and Anr.

Pappachan Vs State of Kerala