Allowed

Shuhaib.C.M v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Jan 2018Crl.MC/148/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by an accused. Finding that the matter between the petitioner and the victims was amicably settled, the court held that no purpose would be served in further proceedings and quashed the pending trial.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings against the petitioner in SC. No.186/2016 arising from Crime No.184/2015 are quashed.

Shuhaib.C.M Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 28TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 148 of 2018

¶6

---------------------SC 186/2016 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT - II, KASARAGOD CRIME NO. 184/2015 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION , KASARAGOD -----------

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

SHUHAIB.C.M, @ SUBBU.K., AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. SULAIMAN, ADUKKATHIL HOUSE,

¶9

MUKKOOD, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA,

¶13

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶14

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶15

2. KRIPESH. M,

¶16

AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN, R/AT KITTUVALAPPIL HOUSE,

¶17

RAMAGIRI, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶18

3. MANIKANDAN. A,

¶19

AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, R/AT EROL VEEDU,

¶20

KOTTILANGAD, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶21

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI C.S.HRITHWICK

¶22

R2,R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SUBHASH

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

K.V.

¶25

Crl.MC.No. 148 of 2018 ()

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶28

ANNEXURE AI A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R.IN CRIME NO.184 OF 2015 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE AII A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 184 OF 2015 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE AIII A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE IV A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶29

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL

¶30

K.V. P.S.TO JUDGE

¶31

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶32

¶33

Crl.M.C. No.148 of 2018

¶34

Dated this the 18^th day of January, 2018

¶35

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

¶36

Petitioner is the accused in SC. No.186/2016 of

¶37

the Additional District and Sessions Court-II, Kasaragod, which has arisen from Crime No.184/2015 of Hosdurg Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 308 and 506(i) read with Section 149 IPC.

¶38

It seems that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, who is the 2^nd respondent herein. The 3^rd respondent is the other injured.

¶39

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. Respondents 2 and 3 have filed separate affidavits as Annexures-AIII and AIV

¶40

Crl.M.C.148/2018

¶41

: 2 :

¶42

respectively, affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between them and the petitioner and they have no complaints against the petitioner.

¶43

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 petitioner in SC. No.186/2016 of the Additional District and Sessions Court-II, Kasaragod, which has arisen from Crime No.184/2015 of Hosdurg Police Station, can be quashed.

¶44

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioner in SC. No.186/2016 of the Additional District and Sessions Court-II, Kasaragod, which has arisen from Crime No.184/2015 of Hosdurg Police Station, are quashed.

¶45

Sd/- (B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE)

¶46

aks/18/01

¶47

// True Copy //

Shuhaib.C.M v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shuhaib.C.M 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

Fr. Jacob Sherry Chacko Vs State of Kerala

Siraj Mather Vs State of Kerala

[email protected] Vs the State of Kerala

Abdulla B.A. Vs State of Kerala

Krishna Sai Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Sadik Vs State of Kerala