Allowed

Manoj v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Mar 2016Crl.MC/1143/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash further proceedings in a criminal case (C.C. No. 990/2012) against the petitioners. The court noted that the matter had been amicably settled, as evidenced by affidavits from the defacto complainant and other injured parties.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings in C.C. No. 990/2012 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Adoor, as against the petitioners based on Annexure-A1 Final Report were quashed.

Manoj Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/24TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1143 of 2016 ()

¶6

CC.NO. 990/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ADOOR CRIME NO. 152/2012 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 4 :

¶8

1. MANOJ, AGED 37 YEARS S/O. GOPI MANOJ MANDIRAM,

¶9

NADUVILAKARA MURI, MANNADI KADAMPANAD, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶10

2. ANILKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS

¶11

S/O. SASIDHARAN, SANTHA BHAVANAM, MYLAMKULAM MAVADY, PUTHOOR, KULAKKADA VILLAGE KOTTARAKKARA.

¶12

3. SURESH, AGED 47 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN, PANIKKACHIRA VADAKKATHIL KANNAMKODE ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶13

4. BEENA, AGED 34 YEARS W/O. ANILKUMAR, SANTHA BHAVANAM, MYLAMKULAM, MAVADY PUTHOOR, KULAKKADA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.SERGI JOSEPH THOMAS

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE, CW1 TO CW6 :

¶16

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

¶17

2. RAMKUMAR, AGED 29 YEARS S/O. VASU PULIMPARAPADINJATTATHIL VEEDU PANDAPLAVU MURI, PATTAZHI - 689 641.

¶18

3. SREEJI, AGED 30 YEARS S/O. SHAJI SREENILAYAM, NADUVILA MURI MANNADIKALA WEST KADAMPANAD VILLAGE,

¶19

ADOOR - 689 641.

¶20

...2/-

¶21

Crl.MC.No. 1143 of 2016 () -3-

¶22

4. AJIKUMAR, AGED 39 YEARS S/O.RAGHAVAN, ANIL SADANAM, THAZHATHUKULAKKADA THATTARUMUKKU, KULAKKADA, KOLLAM - 691 009.

¶23

5. MAHESH @ KUKKU, AGED 22 YEARS S/O. MOHANAN, MANU BHAVANAM, ERAVICHIRA KIZHAKKU KUNNUMPURAM, SOORANADU, KOLLAM - 691 006.

¶24

6. OMANA, AGED 50 YEARS W/O. NALINAKSHAN, MUTHERIPADINJATTEPURA VEEDU MANNADIKALA WEST, NADUVILAKKARA, KADAMPANAD ADOOR - 691 002.

¶25

7. NALINAKSHAN, AGED 56 YEARS S/O. KUNJU PANIKKAN, MUTHERIPADINJATTEPURA VEEDU MANNADIKALA WEST, NADUVILAKKARA, KADAMPANAD ADOOR - 689 642.

¶26

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA

¶27

R2 TO R7 BY ADVS. SRI.K.SHAJ

¶28

SRI.SAJJU S.

¶29

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶30

¶31

...3/-

¶32

Crl.MC.No. 1143 of 2016 ()

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶35

ANNEXURE A1 : THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO. 990/2012 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ADOOR ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 152/2012 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION.

¶36

ANNEXURE A2 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES.

¶37

ANNEXURE A3 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES.

¶38

ANNEXURE A4 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES.

¶39

ANNEXURE A5 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL DISPUTES.

¶40

ANNEXURE A6 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES.

¶41

ANNEXURE A7 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SEVENTH RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES.

¶42

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶47

================ Crl.M.C. No. 1143 of 2016

¶48

=======================

¶49

Dated this the 14^th day of March, 2016

¶50

O R D E R

¶51

Petitioners are the accused in C.C. No.990/2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Adoor, which has arisen from Crime No.152/2012 of the Enathu Police Station, Pathanamthitta District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 452 and 427 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶52

The matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The defacto complainant, who is the 2^nd respondent and five other injured have filed separate affidavits as Annexures – A2 to A7 affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between them and the petitioners and they have no complaints against the petitioners.

¶53

No criminal antecedents have been reported

¶54

Crl.M.C. No. 1143 of 2016

¶55

-: 2 :-

¶56

against the petitioners. When the matter has been amicably settled, no purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further, and therefore, all further proceedings in C.C. No.990/2012 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Adoor, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure-A1 Final Report, can be quashed.

¶57

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.990/2012 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Adoor, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure-A1 Final Report, are hereby quashed.

¶58

Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶59

stu

Manoj v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj 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

Yohannan Vs State of Kerala

Sulaiman Vs State of Kerala

Sunil T. Vs State of Kerala

Aslam Vs the State of Kerala

Shabeer Ali Thambara Vs State of Kerala

Sreemon B. Vs State of Kerala