Allowed

Jude Sajith Decruz v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Feb 2018Crl.MC/652/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash FIR No.1566/2015 and subsequent criminal proceedings. The court found that the matter had been amicably settled between the parties, supported by an affidavit from the complainant, with no criminal antecedents for the accused, deeming further trial unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Crl.MC.No. 652 of 2018 is allowed; all further proceedings in C.C.No.103 of 2016 against the petitioners are quashed.

Jude Sajith Decruz Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 23RD MAGHA, 1939

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 652 of 2018

¶6

C.C.NO.103/2016 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

------------

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/A1 TO A3:

¶9

1 JUDE SAJITH DECRUZ, AGED 50, S/O.ANTONY DECRUZ, RAJITONE HOUSE, T.C.44/583, MUTTATHARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2 SAJEER, AGE 37, S/O.ABOOBACKER, HASEENA MANZIL, T.C.34/599, SHANGUMUGHAM WARD, PETTAH VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

3 THOMAS BENJAMIN, AGE 47, S/O BENJAMIN, MERJIN COTTAGE, T.C.34/1710, SHANGUMUGHAM, PETTAH VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

BY ADV.SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & CWI:

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

2. JAMES FERNANDEZ, AGE 61 YEARS, S/O.PHILIP FERNANDEZ, JC VILLA, T.C.NO:34/795(1), CONVENT ROAD, NEAR CARGO, SHANGUMUGHAM WARD, PETTAH VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN CODE:695104.

¶16

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.UDAYA KUMAR K.B

¶17

R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.K.RAJESH

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

Crl.MC.No. 652 of 2018 ()

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶23

ANNEXURE-A: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1566/2015 OF VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-B: AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/CWI STATING SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE.

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES - NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PS TO JUDGE

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.652 of 2018

¶30

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2018

¶31

ORDER

¶32

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.103 of 2016

¶33

of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram, which has arisen from Crime No.1566/2015 of the Valiyathura Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 341 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶34

It seems that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.

¶35

On going through the facts and circumstances of the case, it seems that the matter can be permitted to be settled. No criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioners. Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit as Annexure-B, affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioners and he has no complaints against the petitioners. Considering the fact that the matter has already been settled amicably between the parties, this Court is satisfied that no purpose would be served in proceeding with

¶36

¶37

Crl.M.C.No.652 of 2018

¶38

the trial of the case. Matters being so, all further proceedings in C.C.No.103 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram, which has arisen from Crime No.1566/2015 of the Valiyathura Police Station, against the petitioners, are liable to be quashed.

¶39

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.103 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram, which has arisen from Crime No.1566/2015 of the Valiyathura Police Station, against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶42

skj

Jude Sajith Decruz v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jude Sajith Decruz 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

Arathi Vs State of Kerala

Lijo Joseph Vs State Polic Chief

Binu M Vs State of Kerala

K.M.Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Haneef @ Jackie Haneef Vs State of Kerala

Abdulla.N.S Vs State of Kerala