Allowed

Nikhil.T. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Feb 2018Crl.MC/740/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed a Criminal Miscellaneous petition for quashing criminal proceedings. The court quashed further proceedings against the petitioners in Sessions Court, noting the matter was amicably settled and no ingredients for Section 308 IPC remained due to lack of serious injuries.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.587 of 2017, Additional District & Sessions Court-I, Kasaragod, arising from Crime No.595/2015, are quashed.

Nikhil.T. Vs 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 B.KEMAL PASHA

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 26TH MAGHA, 1939

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 740 of 2018

¶6

SC.NO.587/2017 of ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT-I, KASARAGOD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 TO 3

¶8

1 NIKHIL.T.,

¶9

AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, MANIYAT, MANIYAT VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶10

2 VINEESH,

¶11

AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, CHANDERA, PILICODE

¶12

VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶13

3 BABU K.,

¶14

AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.T. KRISHNAN, THEKKE MANIYAT, MANIYAT

¶15

VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶16

BY ADV.SRI.VIPIN T JOSE

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶18

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

¶19

2. NIDHIN NATH. M.,

¶20

AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. RAGHUNATHAN, R/AT KUTHIRUMMAL HOUSE, THEKKE MANIYAT, HOSDURG TALUK - 671 315.

¶21

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶22

R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

¶25

Crl.MC.No. 740 of 2018 ()

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶28

ANNEXURE A1: A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO. 595 OF 2015 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION.

¶29

ANNEXURE AII: A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 595

¶30

OF 2015 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION.

¶31

ANNEXURE AIII: A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶32

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES - NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PS TO JUDGE

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶37

Crl.M.C.No.740 of 2018

¶38

Dated this the 15^th day of February, 2018

¶39

ORDER

¶40

Petitioners are the accused in S.C.No.587 of 2017 of the Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Kasaragod, which has arisen from Crime No.595/2015 of the Chandera Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 & 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶41

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

¶42

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. No serious injuries are there on the injured. All the cases relating to the matter were settled. Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit as Annexure-A-III affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioners and he has no complaints against the petitioners.

¶43

¶44

Crl.M.C.No.740 of 2018

¶45

When the matter has been amicably settled

¶46

between the parties, no purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Matters being so, all further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.587 of 2017 of the Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Kasaragod, which

¶47

has arisen from Crime No.595/2015 of the Chandera Police Station, can be quashed.

¶48

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.587 of 2017 of the Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Kasaragod, which has arisen from Crime No.595/2015 of the Chandera Police Station, are quashed.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶51

skj

¶52

True copy

¶53

P.A. to Judge

Nikhil.T. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nikhil.T. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balachandran Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Nashid Vs State of Kerala

P.C. Jose Vs State of Kerala

Jalaluddeen Thangal Vs State of Kerala

Mathew Jacob Vs State of Kerala

Chand Khadeeja Vs State of Kerala