Allowed

Niranjan Bhaskaran @ Sathi v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jun 2018Crl.MC/3065/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous application to quash trial-level proceedings for IPC offences. The court quashed the case following a settlement between the accused and complainants but imposed a Rs. 2,000 cost penalty for the accused's past non-appearance contributing to judicial delay.

What did the court decide?

Criminal miscellaneous application allowed; proceedings in LP No. 168/2017 quashed; petitioner ordered to deposit Rs. 2,000 with the High Court Conciliation and Mediation Centre.

Niranjan Bhaskaran @ Sathi Vs the State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 4TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3065 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN LP 168/2017 of TEMPORARY COURT OF JMFC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (JMFC XII) CRIME NO. 1046/2012 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED

¶8

NIRANJAN BHASKARAN @ SATHI, S/O.BHASKARAN, APXIV PERUNGUZHI, AZHOOR CHIRAYINKIYIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADV.SRI.M.R.SARIN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2. CHANDRAKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.SADANANDAN, SUJABHAVAN, PATTUKKUNNU, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

3. SUJAKUMARI, AGED 39 YEARS, D/O.GIRIJA, SUJABHAVAN,PATTUKKUNNU, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶14

R2,3 BY ADV. SRI.V.VINAR R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR T.R.RANJITH

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 3065 of 2018 ()

¶17

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶19

ANNEXURE A1	THE CERTIFIED COPY PEROORKADA POLICE	OF THE FIR NO.1046/12 OF STATION.
ANNEXURE A2	CERTIFIED COPY OF PENDING BEFORE THIRUVANATHAPURAM.	THE FINAL REPORT IN LPNO.168/17 TEMPORARY JFCM COURT
ANNEXURE A3	AFFIDAVIT FILED BY	THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A4	AFFIDAVIT FILED BY	THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶20

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:

¶21

NIL

¶22

/TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE.

¶23

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶24

¶25

Crl.M.C.No.3065 of 2018

¶26

¶27

Dated this the 25^th day of June, 2018

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in LP No.168/2017 of the Temporary Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, arising from Crime No.1046/2012 of Peroorkada Police station for offences punishable under sections 294(b), 451, 506(ii) of IPC.

¶30

The allegation of the prosecution is that, accused trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and abused the second respondent with filthy language. Complaint was laid and crime was registered. Petitioner is stated to have settled the dispute with the second and third respondents who are the defacto complainant and victim. Affidavits affirmed by the second and third respondents have been produced as Annexures A3 and A4. Learned counsel for the second and third respondents have acknowledged the due execution of the above affidavits and submitted that, they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner.

¶31

Crl.M.C.No.3065/2018

¶32

¶33

Having considered the settlement arrived at between the parties, submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that settlement has been communicated to the investigating officer, I am inclined to quash the entire proceedings. It is seen that, though crime is of the year 2012, the petitioner herein did not appear before the court below. Ultimately, the court had to include the case in the LP Register. Definitely, the petitioner by his conduct contributed for delay in the judicial proceedings, for which I am inclined to impose cost while quashing the proceedings.

¶34

Accordingly, Crl.M.C.stands allowed. All further proceedings in L.P.No.168/2017 of the Temporary Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram will stand quashed on condition that the petitioner herein deposits a sum of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) before the Kerala High Court Conciliation and Mediation Centre, within one month from today and files proof before this court.

¶35

Sd/ -

¶36

SUNIL THOMAS Judge

¶37

dpk

¶38

/true copy/ PS to Judge.

¶39

Crl.M.C.No.3065/2018 3

Niranjan Bhaskaran @ Sathi v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Bhaskaran @ Sathi v. the 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

Jacob Vs State of Kerala

Balachandran Vs State of Kerala

Anas Vs State of Kerala

Sebastian Alakkattuserry Vs State of Kerala

Sanal Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Arun Prakashan Vs State of Kerala