Allowed

Rajkumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Mar 2016Crl.MC/1534/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Miscellaneous Order allowed the petitioners to quash further proceedings in a criminal case involving offences under the Indian Penal Code. The court held that since the matter was amicably settled and affirmed by the complainant, proceeding further served no purpose.

What did the court decide?

Quashed all further proceedings in C.C. No.389/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada, against the petitioners based on the Final Report.

Rajkumar 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

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

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1534 of 2016 ()

¶6

CC.NO. 389/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KATTAKKADA CRIME NO. 142/2015 OF VILAPPILSALA POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. RAJKUMAR, S/O.MANIYAN, AGED 32, KIZHAKKEKKARA PUTHEN VEEDU, KKPNRA NO.110, KKP NAGAR, PLAVODE, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

2. VIJESH, S/O.VIKRAMAN, AGED 29, ARAPPURA HOUSE, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

3. MAHESH, S/O.MADHU, AGED 30 YEARS, DARSANA, KKP NAGAR, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

4. PRATHEESH, S/O.THANKAPPAN, AGED 30 YEARS, KUZHIVILA HOUSE, NEAR BHARATHEEYA VIDYA BHAVAN, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

5. SANEESH KUMAR @ ANI, S/O.RAJAPPAN, AGED 36, S.S.NIVAS, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶13

6. PRAKASH, S/O.KUTTAPPAN,AGED 29 YEARS, THERIVILA PUTHENVEEDU, KALAGRAMAM, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

7. KIRAN, S/O.JAYAKUMAR, AGED 26 YEARS, PANAYARVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KALAGRAMAM, KODUNGANOOR DESOM, VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

2/-

sts

-2-

CRL.MC.NO.1534/2016

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT :

¶21

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

¶22

2. THE SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, VILAPPILSALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶23

3. EDWIN GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, AGED 50 YEARS, CHRIST NILAYAM, KURISUMUTTAM MURI, VILAPPIL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶24

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE R3 BY ADV. SRI.R.ARUN

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

sts

¶27

Crl.MC.No. 1534 of 2016 ()

¶28

APPENDIX

¶29

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:

¶30

ANNEXURE-A1. TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.142/2015. ANNEXURE-A2. TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶31

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

sts

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶37

................................................................ CRL.M.C. No. 1534 of 2016

¶38

............................................................... Dated this the 23^rd day of March, 2016

¶39

O R D E R

¶40

Petitioners are the accused in C.C. No.389/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada, which has arisen from Crime No.142/2015 of the Vilappilsala Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 427 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 149 IPC.

¶41

The matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, who is the third respondent herein. The defacto complainant has filed Annexure A2 affidavit affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioners and he has no complaints against the petitioners.

¶42

CRL.M.C.No. 1534 of 2016

¶43

-: 2 :-

¶44

No criminal antecedents have been reported 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.389/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure A1 Final Report in Crime No.142/2015 of the Vilappilsala Police Station, can be quashed.

¶45

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C. No.389/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure A1 Final Report in Crime No.142/2015 of the Vilappilsala Police Station, are hereby quashed.

¶46

Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶47

ul/-

¶48

[True copy] P.S. to Judge

Rajkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar 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

M/S.West -Coast Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Mahshoof @ Mahsood Vs State of Kerala

Elinha Muneer @ Muneer E.M Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Hasim Vs Union Territory of Lekshadweep

Gireesh.M Vs the State of Kerala

Abdul Sajeer Vs the State of Kerala