Allowed

Riyas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Mar 2015Crl.MC/857/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Responding to a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash an FIR for attempted murder and related offences arising from a dispute, the High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, allowed the petition. The court found that the dispute was amicably settled and held that continuing the prosecution would only serve to waste judicial time, particularly noting the lack of merit in the charge of attempted mu

What did the court decide?

The FIR in Crime No. 773/2014 and further proceedings were quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Riyas Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/26TH PHALGUNA, 1936

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 857 of 2015 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 773/2014 OF THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 :

¶8

1. RIYAS, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.KUTTIYEMU, NADUVIL KANDIYIL HOUSE, VAVAD P.O. THAMARASSERY TALUK.

¶9

2. SHIHAB, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.POKERKUTTY, PUTHIYAPURAYIL HOUSE, KOODATHAI BAZAR THAMARASSERY TALUK.

¶10

3. SAID, AGED 28 YEARS

¶11

S/O.POKERKUTTY, PUTHIYAPURAYIL HOUSE, KOODATHAI BAZAR, THAMARASSERY TALUK.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.LUIZ GODWIN D' COUTH

¶13

RESPONDENTS/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT :

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY S.I OF POLICE, THAMARASSERY THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶15

HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶16

2. MUHAMMED SAKARIYA, 42 YEARS S/O.ABDURAHIMANKUTTY HAJI, KALATHIL HOUSE, MANGAD P.O. UNNIKULAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 673 001.

¶17

...2/-

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 857 of 2015 () -2-

¶19

*ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED

¶20

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

¶21

*ADDL.R3. AZARUDEEN S/O. MOYEENKUTTY NADUVIL KANDI VEEDU THAMARASSERY – 673 020 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT RESPONDENT NO.3 TO BE IMPLEADED

¶22

*IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17/3/15 IN CRL.MA NO. 2207/15.

¶23

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA

¶24

R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE KURIAKOSE (VILANGATTIL)

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶26

ON 17-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

¶28

...3/-

¶29

Crl.MC.No. 857 of 2015 ()

¶30

APPENDIX

¶31

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶32

ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT.

¶33

ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.773/2014 OF THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION.

¶34

ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT/SECOND RESPONDENT.

¶35

ANNEXURE D: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY AZARUDEEN DATED 18.2.2015.

¶36

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

P.UBAID, J.

Crl.M.C No.857 of 2015

¶42

Dated this the 17^th March, 2015

¶43

The petitioners seek orders quashing the F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No. 773/2014 of the Thamarassery Police Station, registered under Sections 448, 341, 323, 324, 326 and 307 read with 34 IPC on the complaint of one Muhammed Sakariya. Orders are sought on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between the accused and the de facto complainant out of court. The de facto complainant Muhammed Sakariya 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.

¶44

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; be it at the crime stage or at the trial stage or even at the appellate or revision stage; if the parties have really settled the whole dispute, or if continuance

¶45

Crl.M.C No.857 of 2015

¶46

¶47

of prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, I find a real case of settlement between the parties, and I also find that continuance of prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. I find nothing in this case for a prosecution under Section 307 IPC.

¶48

In the result, this petition is allowed. The F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No. 773/2014 of the Thamarassery Police Station will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

P.UBAID, JUDGE

¶51

Riyas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyas 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

Alrashad Vs State of Kerala

Jackson Vs State of Kerala

Raveendranath Vs State of Kerala

Ajith Kumar Agrawala Vs State of Kerala

Basheer Vs the State of Kerala

Babu Alex @ Babu Vs State of Kerala