Allowed

Saneer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jan 2016Crl.MC/261/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court quashed criminal proceedings in S.C.377/2014 arising from a grievance case involving offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, and 308 IPC. The court held that the matter was amicably settled, making further proceedings purposeless, as injuries were trivial.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in S.C.No.377/2014 against petitioners in Sessions Court, Kozhikode, are quashed.

Saneer Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | 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 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/5TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 261 of 2016 ()

¶6

SC. NO.377/2014 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. SANEER, S/O.USMAN, KIZHAKKAYIL (H), AZHIYUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

2. DHEERAJ, S/O.VASUDEVAN, KUNNUMMAL (H), AZHIYUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

3. RAFSAL, S/O.MOIDU, RAYAROTH(H), AZHIYUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶11

4. BIMITH, S/O. PAVITHRAN, PADMALAYAM, AZHIYUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶12

5. PRAJEESH, S/O. RAJAN, PUZHAKKAL NADEMMAL (H), AZHIYUR AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.MOHANAN V.T.K.

¶14

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶15

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

¶16

2. SARATHLAL,

¶17

S/O.SASIDHARAN, POOKKULAM (H), AZHIYUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶18

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P. MAYA. R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

rs.

¶21

Crl.MC.No. 261 of 2016

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-

¶24

ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AND CHARGE IN S.C.377/2014 ON THE FILE OF DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶25

ANNEXURE-B TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.516/2013 OF CHOMBALA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-C ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶31

................................................................ CRL.M.C. No. 261 of 2016

¶32

............................................................... Dated this the 25^th day of January, 2016

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

Petitioners are the accused in S.C.No.377/2014 of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode, which has arisen from Crime No.516/2013 of the Chombala Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶35

It seems that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The second respondent, who is the defacto complainant has filed Annexure-C affidavit affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioners and he has no complaints against the petitioners. The records reveal that there are no sufficient ingredients to invite an offence under Section 308

¶36

CRL.M.C.No. 261 of 2016

¶37

-: 2 :-

¶38

IPC in the matter. The injuries sustained to the defacto complainant are trivial. 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 further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.377/2014 of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode, which has arisen from Crime No.516/2013 of the Chombala Police Station, can be quashed.

¶39

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.377/2014 of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode, which has arisen from Crime No.516/2013 of the Chombala Police Station, are hereby quashed.

¶40

Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶41

ul/-

¶42

[True copy] P.S. to Judge

Saneer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saneer 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

Ajayan Vs State of Kerala

Padmasree Textiles Vs State of Kerala

S. Suresh Babu Vs Vijayarajan

Sudheesh Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar E.R Vs State of Kerala

Faizal Vs the State of Kerala