Allowed

V.O.Xavier v. Bibi Scaria

Kerala HC29 Mar 2016Crl.MC/1633/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed the First Information Report and all subsequent proceedings under Crl.M.C. 1633 of 2016 regarding offences under Sections 452, 341, 427, 323, 294(b) read with Section 34 IPC. The quashing was ordered as the matter had been amicably settled by the complainant and accused.

What did the court decide?

The CrI.M.C. is allowed and the FIR in Crime No.679/2015 and all further proceedings against the petitioners are quashed.

V.O.Xavier Vs Bibi Scaria — 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

TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/9TH CHAITHRA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1633 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 679/2015 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

V.O.XAVIER, AGED 56 YEARS S/O.OUSEPH, VAZHAKKOTTATHIL VEEDU, NETTOOR - 682 040, MARADU VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

V.X.JOSEPH, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.XAVIER, VAZHAKKOOTTATHIL VEEDU, NETTOOR - 682 040, MARADU VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SAKIR.K.H.

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:

¶12

BIBI SCARIA, AGED 40 YEARS S/O.SCARIA, PAIKKAATTU VEETTIL, KANIYAMTHUNDI ROAD, KUMBALAM DESOM, KUMBALAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶13

STATE OF KERALA

¶14

THROUGH THE S.I OF POLICE, PANANGADU POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

R1 BY ADV. SRI.STAESMON KINATTUKARA R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

CRL.M.C.1633/2016

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶20

ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BY R1 BEFORE THE JFCM-VIII, ERNAKULAM

¶21

ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.679/2015 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION

¶22

ANNEXURE-A3 AFFIDAVIT DTD 11.3.2016 SWORN TO BY R1.

¶23

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

PA to Judge

¶26

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶27

¶28

Crl.M.C. No.1633 of 2016

¶29

Dated this the 29^th day of March, 2016

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

¶32

Petitioners are the accused in Crime

¶33

No.679/2015 of Panangadu Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 341, 427, 323 and 294(b) read with Section 34 IPC.

¶34

It seems that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.

¶35

The defacto complainant, who is the 1^st

¶36

respondent herein, has filed Annexure-A3 affidavit affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioners and presently, he has no complaints against the petitioners. When the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Matters being so, all

¶37

Crl.M.C.1633/2016

¶38

: 2 :

¶39

further proceedings in Annexure-A2 First Information Report in Crime No.679/2015 of Panangadu Police Station can be quashed.

¶40

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-A2 First Information Report in Crime No.679/2015 of Panangadu Police Station and all further proceedings as against the petitioners in it are quashed.

¶41

Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)

¶42

aks/29/03

¶43

// True Copy //

¶44

PA to Judge

V.O.Xavier v. Bibi Scaria

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.O.Xavier v. Bibi Scaria

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

Mohammed Shafi Vs State of Kerala

Shanraj Vs State of Kerala

Achu Vs State of Kerala

Musthafa Vs Soman

Gopalan Vs State of Kerlala

Johnson Vs State of Kerala