Allowed

Vishnu Aravind v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Mar 2015Crl.MC/1408/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal Miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of prosecution. The Court found a genuine amicable settlement between the accused and the complainant in a case involving sections 341, 323, and 324 IPC. Consequently, the Court held that continued prosecution was unnecessary and quashed the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Prosecution against the petitioners in C.C No. 967 of 2013 stood quashed; petitioners released from prosecution and bail bond discharged.

Vishnu Aravind Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/15TH PHALGUNA, 1936

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1408 of 2015 ()

¶6

AGAINST CC 967/2013 of J.M.F.C.,PERUMBAVOOR CRIME NO. 1622/2011 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

VISHNU ARAVIND AGED 23 YEARS

¶9

S/O.ARAVINDHAN, CHENGALI POTTAIKKAL HOUSE SOPHIA COLLEGE ROAD, PERUMBAVOOR KARA

¶10

PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.

¶11

SAM JACOB AGED 29 YEARS

¶12

S/O.KEECHERI VETTIL, PATTAL BHAGAM, PERUMBAVOOR KARA PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

SANNY KURUVILA AGED 26 YEARS S/O.KURUVILA, NIRAPPIL HOUSE, NEAR TO KSEB OFFICE PERUMBAVOOR KARA, PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY ADVS.SRI.S.RENJITH

¶15

SRI.K.R.PRATHISH

¶16

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:

¶17

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

¶18

AJEESH K HASAN, AGED 32 YEARS

¶19

S/O.KHADER, KIZHAKKAN VEETTIL HOUSE PONJASSERI KARA VENGOLA VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNAD THALUK ERNAKULAM.

¶20

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE.P R2 BY SRI.JACOB E SIMON

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 1408 of 2015 ()

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶25

ANNEXURE-A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NO.1622/2011 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-A2: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1622/2011 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION.

¶26

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

/TRUE COPY/

P.S TO JUDGE

P.UBAID, J.

~~~~~~~~~~

Crl.M.C No.1408 of 2015 ~~~~~~~~~~~

¶33

Dated this the 6^th March 2015

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

The petitioners herein are the three accused in C.C No.967 of 2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Perumbavoor. They seek orders quashing the prosecution on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between them and the de facto complainant. Crime in this case was registered under Sections 341, 323 and 324 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code on the complaint of one Ajeesh, who is the 2^nd respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He has filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the whole dispute with the accused, and he has no grievance or complaint now.

¶36

In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution in pending proceedings, if the parties have really settled the whole dispute amicably out of court, and continuance of the

¶37

Crl.M.C No.1408 of 2015

¶38

¶39

prosecution will not serve any purpose in such a circumstance of amicable settlement. Here, I find a real and genuine case of settlement between the parties. This is not a case involving any public interest or public issue. The parties have come to terms amicably on the intervention of persons acceptable to both sides, and I am satisfied that the parties are now on quite cordial terms. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will support the prosecution in such a situation, if the case goes to trial.

¶40

In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners herein in C.C No.967 of 2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Perumbavoor will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged.

¶41

SD/P.UBAID JUDGE

¶42

ma /True copy/

¶43

P.S to Judge

Vishnu Aravind v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Aravind 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chacko Joseph Vs State Represented by Public Prosecutor

Suresh Vs Excise Inspector

Johnson Vs State of Kerala

Shaji Paul Vs State of Kerala

Sunny Chacko Vs State of Kerala

Vijayalakshmi Ranganath Vs the State of Kerala