Allowed

Sarun, S/O.Sivan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Jan 2016Crl.MC/58/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed this criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed all further proceedings in the Sessions Court concerning the petitioners. The matter had been amicably settled between the petitioners and the defacto complainant (Second Respondent), who filed an affidavit confirming the settlement and absence of complaints, rendering the prosecution unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in S.C. No.595/2015 against the petitioners based on Final Report in Crime No.328/2014 are quashed.

Sarun, S/O.Sivan 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

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/28TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 58 of 2016

¶6

S.C.NO.595/2015 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD

¶7

CRIME NO. 328/2014 OF MALAMPUZHA POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶9

1. SARUN, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.SIVAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE, KOYYAMARAKKADU, KANJIKODE, PALAKAKD DISTRICT.

¶10

2. SHINU, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, GANDHI NAGAR, MAYAMBALAM, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD.

¶11

3. KIRAN, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.KANNAN, SOMANPURA, KADUKKAMKUNNU, PALAKKAD.

¶12

4. SHIJU, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.SADANANDAN @ SAHADEVAN, SURYA NAGAR, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD.

¶13

5. NANDAKISHORE, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.VALSALAN, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE POST, PALAKKAD.

¶14

6. AJEESH KUMAR, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.KUMARAN @ MADHAVAN, AISWARYA NIVAS, NAGOORCHALLA, KANJIKODE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶15

(PETITIONERS WERE STUDENTS OF ITI, MALAMPUZHA, PALAKKAD)

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH SIVARAMANKUTTY

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT`:

¶18

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

¶19

..2/-

¶20

..2..

¶21

Crl.MC.No. 58 of 2016

¶22

2. NITHIN, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.ACHUTHAN, PALPPARA HOUSE, ETHANUR, KODUVAYUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, (STUDENT OF ITI, MALAMPUZHA, PALAKAD DISTRICT).

¶23

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

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

Msd.

¶26

Crl.MC.No. 58 of 2016

¶27

APPENDIX

¶28

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :

¶29

ANNEXURE A: CERTIFIED COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.328/2014 OF MALAMPUZHA POLICE STATION.

¶30

ANNEXURE B: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AND PENDING ON FILES OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, PALAKAKD AS S.C.NO.595/2015.

¶31

ANNEXURE C: AFFIDAVIT BY 2ND RESPONDENT FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE COURT.

¶32

ANNEXURE D: TRUE COPY OF OFFER OF APPOINTMENT TO 5TH PETITIONER BY SOUTHERN RAILWAY.

¶33

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶39

................................................................ CRL.M.C. No. 58 of 2016

¶40

............................................................... Dated this the 18^th day of January, 2016

¶41

O R D E R

¶42

Petitioners are accused in S.C. No.595/2015 of the Assistant Sessions Court, Palakkad, which has arisen from Crime No.328/2014 of the Malampuzha Police Station, Palakkad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 321, 324, 506(ii) and 308 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 149 IPC.

¶43

The matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, who is the second respondent herein. The defacto complainant has filed Annexure C affidavit affirming that the matter has been

¶44

amicably settled between him and the petitioners and he has no complaints against the petitioners.

¶45

The records clearly reveal that there are no

¶46

CRL.M.C.No. 58 of 2016

¶47

-: 2 :-

¶48

sufficient ingredients to invite an offence under Section 308 IPC in the matter. 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 S.C. No.595/2015 of the Assistant Sessions Court, Palakkad, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure B Final Report in Crime No.328/2014 of the Malampuzha Police Station, Palakkad, can be quashed.

¶49

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in S.C. No.595/2015 of the Assistant Sessions Court, Palakkad, as against the petitioners, based on Annexure B Final Report in Crime No.328/2014 of the Malampuzha Police Station, Palakkad, are hereby quashed.

¶50

Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶51

ul/-

¶52

[True copy] P.S. to Judge

Sarun, S/O.Sivan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarun, S/O.Sivan 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

Shameer Vs State of Kerala

Rahul Ramesh Vs Sanal Kumar

Muhammed Kunhi K.P Vs the State of Kerala

Abdulla.M Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Nalli Viswanath Vs State of Kerala

Shiju Mathew Vs State of Kerala