Allowed

Kiran Ghosh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Feb 2016Crl.MC/138/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the petition to quash further criminal proceedings against the petitioners in CC No.1167/2014. The court held that since the matter was amicably settled and affirmed by the de facto complainant via affidavit, no purpose would be served in continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. No.138 of 2016 allowed; further proceedings in C.C. No.1167/2014 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta, as against the petitioners, were quashed.

Kiran Ghosh Vs State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/22ND MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 138 of 2016 ()

¶6

CC. NO.1167/2014 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA. CRIME NO.122/2012 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶8

1. KIRAN GHOSH, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.AJAYA GHOSH, RESIDING AT MANAYATHU VEEDU, KUMBAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 653.

¶9

ADDL. 2ND PETITIONER IMPLEADED

¶10

2. RATHEESHKUMAR, S/O. SASIDHARAN NAIR, AGED 25 YEARS, CHAKKUPARAKALAYILVEEDU, MALAYALAPUZHA VILLAGE, KONNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶11

*** ADDL. 2ND PETITIONER IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11/02/2016 IN CRL.MA. NO.1277/2016.**

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN.

¶13

RESPONDENTSCOMPLAINANT & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION WHO IS REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

2. SIDHIQUE, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. NABEESATHU BEEVI, RESIDING AT VETTOOR LAKSHAM VEETIL, RADIO JUNCTION, VETTOOR MURI, KONNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 653.

¶16

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE. R2 BY ADV. SMT.K.V.SAMUDRA

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

rs.

¶19

Crl.MC.No. 138 of 2016

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-

¶22

ANNEXURE A1-	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.122/2012 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA.
ANNEXURE A2-	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE BEFORE THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA IN C.C.1167/2014.
ANNEXURE A3-	THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 16.09.2015.
ANNEXURE A4-	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17/07/2014 IN C.C. NO.250/2012 IN THE FILES OF JFMC-I, PATHANAMTHITTA.
ANNEXURE A5-	THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 23/01/2016 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT.

¶23

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶28

================ Crl.M.C. No. 138 of 2016

¶29

======================= Dated this the 11^th day of February, 2016

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

Petitioners are the accused in C.C. No.1167/2014 of

¶32

the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta, which has arisen from Crime No.122/2012 of the Pathanamthitta Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 427 and 294(b) read with Section 34 IPC.

¶33

The matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, who is the 2^nd respondent herein. The defacto complainant has filed Annexure-A3 affidavit affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioners and he has no complaints against the petitioners.

¶34

No criminal antecedents have been reported

¶35

Crl.M.C. No. 138 of 2016

¶36

-: 2 :-

¶37

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.1167/2014 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta,, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure-A2 Final Report, can be quashed.

¶38

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C. No.1167/2014 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta,, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure-A2 Final Report, are hereby quashed.

¶39

Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶40

stu

Kiran Ghosh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Ghosh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramanan Vs State of Kerala

Alshamari Sultan Fahad Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Vs State of Kerala

Xavier Biju Vs State of Kerala

Ejas Ahammed Molathai Vs State of Kerala

Musthafa Vs the Detective Inspector of Cbcid