Allowed

Jayan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Mar 2015Crl.MC/303/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court quashed the prosecution against eight accused persons in an IPC case involving non-compoundable charges. The Court found a genuine amicable settlement between the accused and the complainant, noting no public interest remained. Consequently, the prosecution was quashed, and the accused were released with bail bonds discharged.

What did the court decide?

Prosecution in C.C.No.400/2014 quashed; petitioners released; bail bonds discharged.

Jayan 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

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/21ST PHALGUNA, 1936

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 303 of 2015 ()

¶6

CC 400/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,HOSDRUG CRIME NO. 1155/2011 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT =================

¶7

PETITIONERS/A1 TO A8:

¶8

1. JAYAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE KRISHNAN KUNNUMAL HOUSE, RAVANESHWARAM CHITHARI GRAMAM, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶9

2. SREENATH, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN MUKKUDU, RAVANESHWARAM CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶10

3. MOHANAN, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.DAMODARAN KOTTILAGADU HOUSE, ORAVANKARA CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶11

4. RANJITH, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.RATNAKARAN RAMAGIRI KITTUVALLAPU, RAVANESHWARAM CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶12

5. MANESH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.SHANTHA KALINGAL, MUKKUDU, RAVANESHWARAM CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶13

6. SHIJITH, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.JAYAN, KUNNUMAL CHIRAKKAL, MUKKUDU, RAVANESHWARAM CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶14

7. VINOD @ VINU, AGED 21 YEARS , S/O.RAPPAKUNJI KOTTILAGADU, CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶15

8. SAI K., AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.JANU NARAYANAN KOTTILAGADU, CHITHARI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.VISHNU (TRIPUNITHURA)

¶16

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶17

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I. OF POLICE HOSDURG (CRIME 1155/11 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 303 of 2015 () -2-

¶19

2. MOOSA B.K., AGED 45 YEARS S/O.ABDUL KHADER, MOOSAMIL HOUSE, KOTTILLAGADU HOSDURG TALUK, RAVANESHWARAM P.O., CHITHARI VILLAGE KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN-671 316.

¶20

R2 BY ADV. SRI.C.M.JUNAIR R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2015, ALONG WITH CRMC. 309/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 303 of 2015 ()

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶25

ANNEXURE I : A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AS C.C.400/14 PENDING ON THE FILE OF JFCM-I COURT, HOSDURG.

¶26

ANNEXURE II : AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY CW1 IN ANNEXURE-I.

¶27

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶28

NIL

¶29

// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE

¶30

¶31

P.UBAID, J.

¶32

Crl.M.C No.303 of 2015

¶33

Dated this the 12^th March, 2015

¶34

The petitioners herein are the eight accused in C.C.No.400/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg. 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 143, 147, 148, 427, 452, 506(ii) and 153(A) read with 149 IPC on the complaint of one Moosa, 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.

¶35

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

¶36

Crl.M.C No.303 of 2015

¶37

¶38

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.

¶39

In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners herein in C.C.No.400/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg 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.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

¶42

Crl.M.C No.303 of 2015 3

Jayan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayan 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

Abhilash A.C Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh P. Vs State of Kerala

Lijo Vs State of Kerala

Ajeesh Vs State of Kerala

Nellissery Rasheed @ Babu Vs Riyas

Riyas Vs Sunilkumar