Quashed

Abdul Khader, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Apr 2019Crl.MC/1070/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court, in a criminal miscellaneous petition, quashed the charge sheet and criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The court found that the dispute was amicably settled by the respondents and their continuance would serve no purpose, applying established principles to allow quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Charge Sheet (Anx-A1) and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused stand quashed.

Abdul Khader, Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1070 of 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 271/2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶8

ABDUL KHADER, AGED 19 YEARS S/O. SOOPI, THAYIL HOUSE, CHEKALA, CHENGALA VILLAGE, KASARGODE.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE-COMPLAINANT & VICTIMS

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VIDYA NAGAR POLICE STATION, KASARGODE DISTRICT 671 121.

¶13

3 RAIZANA, AGED 16, D/O. MUHAMMED, CHENGALA HOUSE, CHENGALA VILLAGE, KASSARGODE DISTRICT 671 541, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER RAHIYANATH, AGED 46, W/O. MUHAMMED, CHENGALA HOUSE, CHENGALA VILLAGE, KASSARGODE DISTRICT 671 541.

¶14

4 RAHIYANATH,

¶15

AGED 46 YEARS

¶16

W/O. MUHAMMED, CHENGALA HOUSE, CHENGALA VILLAGE, KASSARGODE DISTRICT 671 541.

¶17

5 MUHAMMED, AGED 65 YEARS

¶18

S/O. UMMEER, CHENGALA HOUSE, CHENGALA VILLAGE, KASSARGODE DISTRICT 671 541.

¶19

SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1 AND R2, SRI.SHAHIM BIN AZIZ FOR R3 TO R5

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

Crl.MC.No. 1070 of 2019

¶22

¶23

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶24

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C. No.1070 of 2019

¶25

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 09^th day of April, 2019

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

The petitioner is the sole accused in the impugned Anx-A1 Charge Sheet in Crime No.305/2018 of Vidya Nagar Police Station, Kasargode, registered for offences punishable under Sec.363 of the IPC, which has led to the institution of C.C.No.271/2018 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragode. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioner and contesting respondents 3 to 5 have been settled amicably and that the contesting respondents 4 & 5 have sworn to Anxs.A3 & A4 affidavits before this Court, wherein it is stated that they have settled the entire disputes with the petitioner and that they have no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioner has preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with the prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against him.

¶28

In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High

¶29

Crl.MC.No. 1070 of 2019

¶30

¶31

Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr . reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

¶32

Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the impugned Anx-A1 Charge Sheet in Crime No.305/2018 of Vidya Nagar Police Station, Kasargode, which has led to the institution of C.C.No.271/2018 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragode and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against

¶33

Crl.MC.No. 1070 of 2019

¶34

¶35

accused will stand quashed.

¶36

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

¶39

vgd

¶40

Crl.MC.No. 1070 of 2019

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶44

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME NO. 305 OF 2018 OF VIDYA NAGAR POLICE STATION, KASARGODE DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO. 305 OF 2018 OF VIDYA NAGAR POLICE STATION, KASARGODE DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY 4TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY 5TH RESPONDENT.

Abdul Khader, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Khader, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranesh, Vs the State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

Mujeeb Rahman Vs the State of Kerala

Shan@Siyad Vs State of Kerala

Pulikkal Rashad Vs State of Kerala

Anil Vs Ambili