Dismissed

Asrudheen K.V. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2016Crl.MC/1001/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal Miscellaneous application seeking to quash proceedings filed against petitioners accused of offences under IPC and the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act. The Court rejected the petitioners' claim of settlement due to the gravity of allegations and lack of settlement by other accused.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous Case (Crl.M.C.) No. 1001 of 2016 is dismissed.

Asrudheen K.V. Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2016/11TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1001 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 765/2015 OF NADAPURAM POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. ASRUDHEEN K.V., AGED 18 YEARS, S/O.USMAN, KURUNNUM VEETIL HOUSE, KUMMANGODE, NADAPURAM P.O., VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 504.

¶9

2. ABDULLA K.V., AGED 18 YEARS, S/O.BASHEER, KURUNNUM VEETIL HOUSE, KUMMANGODE, NADAPURAM P.O., VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 504.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.JOHN MATHEW (THEREZHATH) SRI.JOBIN JOHN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682 031.

¶13

2. ANAZ.M, AGED 18 YEARS, S/O.AMMAD, RESIDING AT CHEKKIAD VILLAGE, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 509.

¶14

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA R2 BY ADV. SRI.MURUKESH REGHU

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 1001 of 2016

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :

¶20

ANNEXURE-I: THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR BEARING NO.765/2015 DATED 18.09.2015, REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AT OF NADAPURAM POLICE STATION.

¶21

ANNEXURE-II: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.11.2015 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NOS.77014/2015 AND 6714/2015 IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST AND 2ND PETITIONERS/ACCUSED.

¶22

ANNEXURE-III: THE TRUE COPY THE LETTER BEARING NO.MET/2360/14 DATED 08.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL OF THE PETITIONERS' COLLEGE.

¶23

ANNEXURE-IV: THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.11.2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER OT MET ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE AT NADAPURAM.

¶24

ANNEXURE-V: THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 01.12.2015 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶31

................................................................ CRL.M.C. No. 1001 of 2016

¶32

............................................................... Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2016

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

¶35

Petitioners are accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crime No.765/2015 of the Nadapuram Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 149 IPC and Sections 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998.

¶36

According to the petitioners, they were members of anti-ragging squad of that particular college and they were present at the spot as members of the anti-ragging squad. Further, according to the petitioners, the matter has

¶37

CRL.M.C.No. 1001 of 2016

¶38

-: 2 :-

¶39

been amicably settled between them and the 2^nd respondent who is the defacto complainant/injured.

¶40

Considering the seriousness of the matter and

¶41

the seriousness of the allegations against the petitioners, this Court is not in a position to accept and endorse the settlement arrived at between the parties. Apart from that, the other accused in the case have not come forward with

¶42

such a settlement. Matters being so, this Crl.M.C. is devoid of merits and is only to be dismissed, and I do so.

¶43

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed.

¶44

Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶45

ul/-

¶46

[True copy] P.S. to Judge

Asrudheen K.V. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asrudheen K.V. 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

Kunjan Thambi Vs State of Kerala

Biju S. Vs State of Kerala

Jeshad Vs Sub Inspector of Police

P.S.Raj Lal Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh K.V. Vs Lalu Kurian

Anas Vs State of Kerala