Allowed

Abhilash. M v. Nidheesh

Kerala HC17 Feb 2016Crl.MC/626/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous case arising from an FIR under various sections of the IPC, this Court allowed the petition to quash the First Information Report and all subsequent proceedings. The Court held that as the matter had been amicably settled between the petitioner-accused and the injured respondents with trivial injuries, no purpose would be served in continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

Annexure-II First Information Report in Crime No.12/2016 and all further proceedings on it against the petitioners are quashed.

Abhilash. M Vs Nidheesh — 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 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/28TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 626 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 12/2016 OF NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

1. ABHILASH. M, S/O. GOPINATHAN, MANADATH GOPIKA, MORIKKARA P.O., KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 611.

¶9

2. ANIL RAJ T.P.,

¶10

S/O. RAJAN, KAVISSERY HOUSE, PUDIYANGADI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 021.

¶11

3. VISHNU RAJ, S/O.JAYARAJ, KUNDOOR, VAZHATHIRUTHI, CIVIL STATION P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 020.

¶12

4. RAHUL M., S/O.MOHANAN, METHALE KALATHIL, KARUVISSERI, MALIKADAV P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 010.

¶13

5. SHIBIN K., S/O.SIVADAS, KIZHAKKEDATH HOUSE, WEST HILL P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 005.

¶14

BY ADVS.SRI.V.G.ARUN

¶15

SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV

¶16

RESPONDENT(S)/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE :

¶17

1. NIDHEESH, S/O.SREEDHARAN, MEYYERIMAL HOUSE, KANNIPARAMBA P.O., MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 661.

¶18

2. SANDEEP K.P., S/O.KRISHNANUNNI K.P., KARALIPILAKKAL HOUSE, KANNIPARAMBA P.O., MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 661.

¶19

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

¶20

R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 626 of 2016

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :

¶25

ANNEXURE I : COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.12 OF 2016 DATED 01.01.2016 OF THE NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE II: COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 01.01.2016 IN CRIME NO.12 OF 2016.

¶26

ANNEXURE III: A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 05.02.2016. ANNEXURE IV: A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 05.02.2016.

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶33

................................................................ CRL.M.C. No. 626 of 2016

¶34

............................................................... Dated this the 17^th day of February, 2016

¶35

O R D E R

¶36

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.12/2016 of the Nadakkavu Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 427 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶37

It seems that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The first respondent, who is the defacto complainant and the 2^nd respondent, who is the other injured person, have filed separate affidavits as Annexures III and IV, affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between them and the petitioners and they have no complaints against the petitioners. The injuries sustained to the injured are trivial.

¶38

CRL.M.C.No. 626 of 2016

¶39

When the matter has been amicably settled

¶40

between the parties, no purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Matters being so, Annexure-II First Information Statement in Crime No.12/2016 of the Nadakkavu Police Station, and all further proceedings on it, as against the petitioners, can be quashed.

¶41

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-II First Information Report in Crime No.12/2016 of the Nadakkavu Police Station, and all further proceedings on it, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.

¶42

Sd/- B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.

¶43

ul/-

¶44

[True copy] P.S. to Judge

Abhilash. M v. Nidheesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhilash. M v. Nidheesh

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

Binosh Philip George Vs State of Kerala

Sudevan Vs State of Kerala

Shajil Vs the State of Kerala

Thomas Zachariah Vs K.S.Savithri

Binu Vs State of Kerala

Binu Vs the State of Kerala