Allowed

Shameer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Mar 2016CRL.A/324/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a criminal appeal against conviction under Sections 320, 323, and 34 of the IPC. Allowing a petition under Section 482 CrPC based on an out-of-court settlement, the court granted leave to compound the offences, discharged the appellants, and set aside the lower court's conviction and sentence.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of as compounded. The conviction and sentence under Section 324 IPC were set aside, and the appellants were set at liberty.

Shameer Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2016/ 3RD CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

CRL.A.NO. 324 OF 2004 (C)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC NO.242/2001 OF ADDITIOANL SESSIONS COURT, FAST TRACK(ADHOC-I), ALAPPUZHA DATED 10-02-2004

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/ACCUSED NOS. 2 AND 3:

¶8

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

¶9

1. SHAMEER, KUTTY'S COTTAGE, CIVIL STATION WARD, ALAPPUZHA.

¶10

2. SHANAVAS ALIAS SHANU, YAFIPURAYIDOM, CIVIL STATION WARD, ALAPPUZHA ( IN CUSTODY)

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶13

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶14

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶15

**** ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS IMPLEADED**

¶16

2. AYOOB, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O ABDUL KAREEM,

¶17

KALAPURACKAL HOUSE, BEACH WARD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶18

3. SIYAD, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O RASHEED, SEENATHU MANZIL, ALISSERY WARD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶19

**** ADDITONAL RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23.03.2016 IN CRIMINAL M.A. NO.1275 OF 2016.**

¶20

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. N. SURESH

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

P.D. RAJAN, J.

¶24

Crl. Appeal No.324 of 2004 ---------------------------------Dated this the 23^rd day of March, 2016

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

This appeal is preferred by the 2^nd and 3^rd

¶27

accused against the conviction and sentence in S.C. No.242 of 2001 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track (Adhoc-I), Alappuzha. The accused 1 to 4 were charge sheeted by the Additional Sessions Judge under Secs.308 and 323 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge against the accused is that on 23.08.2000 at 6.30 p.m., accused nos.1 to 4 attacked PW1 and PW2 with deadly weapons like wooden pieces, as a result of which, PW1 and PW2 sustained serious injuries. In this incident, Alappuzha South Police registered a crime against accused nos.1 to 4. After completing investigation, they laid charge against the accused under Sections 308 and 323 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, the case was committed to

¶28

Crl. Appeal No.324 of 2004 2

¶29

Sessions Court, Alappuzha. From there, it was forwarded to Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track(Adhoc-I) for trial. A1 is absconding, hence his case was split up by the trial court.

¶30

During trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW10 and marked Exts.P1 to P9. The trial court admitted MO1 and MO2 as material objects. During cross examination of PW2, Ext.D1 was marked. The incriminating circumstances brought out in evidence were denied by the accused while questioning them. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted 2^nd , 3^rd and 4^th accused for the offence punishable under Secs.308 and 323 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted A2 and A3 under Sec.324 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved by that, they preferred this appeal.

¶31

When the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended

¶32

that the parties have settled the matter out of court and

¶33

Crl. Appeal No.324 of 2004 3

¶34

they filed Crl.M.A. Nos.1273 of 2016, 1274 of 2016 and 1275 of 2016 under Section 482 of the Code.

¶35

The offences punishable under the Indian

¶36

Penal Code are specifically mentioned in the table provided under Sec.320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Sec.320(2) says about the compounding of the case with the permission of the court. According to Sec.320(5) when an accused has been committed for trial or when he has been convicted and an appeal is pending, no compensation for the offence shall be allowed without the leave of the court to which it is committed, or, as the case may be, before which the appeal is to be heard. In the circumstances, sanction is granted to compound the offence. They have filed Crl.M.A. No.1273 of 2016 in which parties on both sides singed, in the circumstance, both parties are permitted to compound the offence. When composition of an offence under section 320(8) is allowed, it shall have the effect of acquittal of the accused with whom the offence has been compounded. In the

¶37

Crl. Appeal No.324 of 2004 4

¶38

circumstance Crl.M.A. No.1275 of 2016 is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed under Sec.324 of the Indian Penal Code are set aside and the appellants are set at liberty.

¶39

Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of as compounded.

¶40

Sd/- P.D. RAJAN, JUDGE

¶41

/ True copy /

¶42

NS/26/03/2016

¶43

P.A. To Judge

Shameer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shameer 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

Union Territory of Lakshadweep Admn. Vs Pattakkal Sayed Ahammed Koya Thangal

P. Preman Vs State of Kerala

Remani Vs State of Kerala

Chellappan Vs State of Kerala

Mattathil Thomas @ Chalakkudi Thomas Vs S.I of Police, Vellarikundu Police

A.K.Ravindran Vs State of Kerala