Allowed

Vipin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Feb 2018Crl.MC/839/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings against VIPIN, accused no.4 in C.C.No.198 of 2016, for offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, and 326 read with Section 34 IPC. The court held that the wound certificate showed no grievous hurt, making Section 326 IPC inapplicable. Furthermore, finding that the matter had been amicably settled between the parties with no criminal antecedents, t

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in C.C.No.198 of 2016 against the petitioner are quashed.

Vipin 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 839 of 2018

¶6

CC.NO. 198/2016 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM CRIME NO. 2096/2013 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA.

¶7

----------

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/4TH ACCUSED

¶9

VIPIN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN PILLAI, PUTHENTHARAYIL HOUSE, VAVVAKKAVU P.O., OACHIRA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690528.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.A.NIDHIN SMT.K.R.ARUNASREE

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND DE FACTO COMPLAINT:

¶12

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

¶13

2. AMAL HANEEF, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMAD HANEEFA, MOORTHIVILLA VADAKKATHIL HOUSE, ATHIKATTUKULANGARA DESOM, ATHIKATTUKULANGARA P.O., NOORANAD VILLAGE, MAVELIKARA TALUK, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690 504.

¶14

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.ALEX M.THOMBRA R2 BY ADV. SMT.RONA GEEVARGHESE

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 839 of 2018 ()

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶20

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 2096 OF 2013 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION.

¶21

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 2096 OF 2013 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION.

¶22

ANNEXURE A3 NOTORIZED AFFIDAVIT DATED 31.O1.2018 EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE- FACTO COMPLAINANT.

¶23

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES - NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PS TO JUDGE

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

¶28

Crl.M.C.No.839 of 2018

¶29

Dated this the 21^st day of February, 2018

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Petitioner is accused No.4 in C.C.No.198 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kayamkulam, which has arisen from Crime No.2096/2013 of the Kayamkulam Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶32

A copy of the wound certificate of the injured has been made available for scrutiny. It does not show any grievous hurt. There had occurred only a contusion on nose and an abrasion on nose. Epistaxis was present. That may be the reason why mistakenly the offence under Section 326 of IPC has been incorporated. In the absence of any grievous hurt, the offence under Section 326 of IPC cannot be invited.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

¶36

Crl.M.C.No.839/2018

¶37

petitioner. Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit as Annexure-A3, affirming that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the petitioner and he has no complaints against the petitioner. 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 the trial of the case. Matters being so, all further proceedings in C.C.No.198 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kayamkulam, which has arisen from Crime No.2096/2013 of the Kayamkulam Police Station, against the petitioner, are liable to be quashed.

¶38

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.198 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kayamkulam, which has arisen from Crime No.2096/2013 of the Kayamkulam Police Station, against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.

¶39

Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE

¶40

skj

¶41

True copy

¶42

P.A. to Judge

Vipin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin 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

Vimal Vs State of Kerala

Ayoob Vs State of Kerala

Ashik Vs State of Kerala

Ajith Lal V.P. Vs State of Kerala

Rahul a. Vs Shameer a.

Vishnudas Vs State of Kerala