Allowed

Muhammad Shafi v. Surendran

Kerala HC8 Feb 2016Crl.MC/549/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal miscellaneous application where the High Court quashed the pending trial against four accused persons. The matter was settled amicably between the accused and complainants, who filed affidavits confirming no complaints, and no further proceedings serve any purpose.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in S.C.No.455 of 2013 before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Vatakara, based on the Final Report are quashed.

Muhammad Shafi Vs Surendran — Writ and Judicial Review | 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 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/19TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 549 of 2016 ()

¶6

SC.NO. 455/2013 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, VADAKARA ST.NO. 105/2013 OF JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD, KOZHIKODE CRIME NO. 989/2010 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1, 2 4 & 5:

¶8

1. MUHAMMAD SHAFI, S/O.ANDRU, AGED 25 YEARS, THAZHEKADUNGOTTU HOUSE, CHANIYAMKADAVU.P.O., VATAKARA TALUK.

¶9

2. ANAS, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 25 YEARS, PUTHYOTTIL HOUSE, CHANIYAMKADAVU P.O., VATAKARA TALUK.

¶10

3. RAYEES, S/O.AMMAD, AGED 25 YEARS, NOCHAMANIL HOUSE, CHANIYAMKADAVU P.O., VATAKARA TALUK.

¶11

4. NASAR, S/O.MOIDU, AGED 27 YEARS, EDAPPULAYATH HOUSE, CHANIYAMKADAVU P.O., VATAKARA TALUK.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶14

1. SURENDRAN, S/O.CHATHU,AGED 39 YEARS, PALORA HOUSE, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM, DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK -673 101.

¶15

2. BABEESH, S/O.SREEDHARAN,AGED 28 YEARS, CHATHOTH HOUSE, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM, DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK -673 101.

¶16

3. SHAJI, S/O.KANAN, AGED 34 YEARS, THIYYARAUKANDY HOUSE, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM, DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK- 673 101.

2/-

sts

-2-

CRL.MC.NO.549/2016

¶21

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

¶22

R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SMT.A.P.RUFAIJA R4 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. MAYA

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

sts

¶25

Crl.MC.No. 549 of 2016 ()

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:

¶28

ANNEX-1:	CERTIFIED COPY OF CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME 989/2010 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION.
ANNEX-2:	CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN S.T 105/2013 OF JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD, KOZHIKODE
ANNEX-3:	SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF IST RESPONDENT
ANNEX-4:	SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF 2ND RESPONDENT
ANNEX-5:	SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF 3RD RESPONDENT

¶29

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶34

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

¶35

CRL.M.C. No.549 of 2016

¶36

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

¶37

Dated this the 8^th day of February, 2016

¶38

O R D E R

¶39

Petitioners are accused in S.C.No.455 of 2013 of

¶40

the Assistant Sessions Judge, Vatakara, which has arisen from Crime No.989 of 2010 of the Vatakara Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 308 and 153A IPC read with Section 149 IPC.

¶41

The 3^rd accused has faced the trial and he was acquitted by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Kozhikode as per Annexure-2 judgment in S.T.No.105 of 2013. The case against accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5, who are the petitioners herein, is now pending as S.C.No.455 of 2013 of the Assistant Sessions Court, Vatakara.

¶42

The matter has been amicably settled between the

¶43

CRL.M.C.No.549 of 2016

¶44

-: 2 :-

¶45

petitioners and the defacto complainant, who is the 1^st respondent herein and the other injured persons, who are respondents 2 and 3 herein. The defacto complainant and

¶46

the other injured persons have filed Annexure-3 to Annexure-5 affidavits, affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between them and the petitioners and they have no complaints against the petitioners.

¶47

No criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. On going through the matter, this Court is satisfied that there are no ingredients to invite an offence under Section 308 IPC in the matter. When the matter has been amicably settled, no purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further, and therefore, all further proceedings in S.C.No.455 of 2013 pending before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Vatakara as against the petitioners, based on Annexure-1 Final Report in Crime No.989 of 2010 of the Vatakara Police Station, can be quashed.

¶48

CRL.M.C.No.549 of 2016

¶49

-: 3 :-

¶50

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in S.C.No.455 of 2013 pending before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Vatakara as against the petitioners, based on Annexure-1 Final Report in Crime No.989 of 2010 of the Vatakara Police Station, are hereby quashed.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶53

DSV/8/2/16

¶54

// True Copy //

¶55

P.A. To Judge

Muhammad Shafi v. Surendran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammad Shafi v. Surendran

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

Vinod K.C Vs Dr.Lal Parameswar

Satheesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Anex Vs State of Kerala

Ibrahim @ Imbayi Vs Sunil

Sivarajan R. Vs State of Kerala

Jomon Joseph Vs State of Kerala