Quashed

Suresh, v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Sept 2019Crl.MC/544/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted quashment of criminal proceedings against three accused for an offence under Section 174 IPC. Based on settlement affidavits from respondents, the Court held that continuing the prosecution would serve no purpose and exercised powers under Section 482 CrPC in accordance with Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Impugned FIR in Crime No.512/2017 and all further proceedings arising therefrom against accused Nos.1 to 3 stand quashed.

Suresh, Vs the 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

MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 11TH BHADRA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.544 OF 2019(G)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 2555/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,IRINJALAKUDA

¶7

CRIME NO.512/2017 OF Varandarappally Police Station , Thrissur

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3:

¶9

1 SURESH, AGED 44 YEARS

¶10

S/O RAGHAVAN, ERUMAKKATTKARUVANNURKARAN HOUSE,KUTTANCHIRA DESOM, VARANTHARAPPILLY P.O.MUKUNDA PURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶11

2 SHAJU, AGED 46 YEARS

¶12

S/O RAGHAVAN, ERUMAKKATTKARUVANNURKARAN HOUSE,KUTTANCHIRA DESOM, VARANTHARAPPILLY P.O.MUKUNDA PURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶13

3 VINOD, AGED 42 YEARS S/O RAGHAVAN, ERUMAKKATTKARUVANNURKARAN HOUSE,KUTTANCHIRA DESOM, VARANTHARAPPILLY P.O.MUKUNDA PURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.N.L.BITTO

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE OF KERALA AND THE COMPLAINANT:

¶16

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA POLICE STATION,THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶17

2 SHOBHANA

¶18

W/O VELAYUDHAN,KANARA HOUSE,PULLU DESOM, PULLU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶19

3 VELAYUDHAN

¶20

W/O RAMANKUTTY,,KANARA HOUSE,PULLU DESOM, PULLU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶21

4 SHYAMKUMAR,

¶22

Crl.MC.No.544 OF 2019(G)

¶23

¶24

S/O VELAYUDHAN,KANARA HOUSE,PULLU DESOM, PULLU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶25

R2-4 BY ADV. K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN

¶26

OTHER PRESENT:

¶27

SMT.PRIYA SHANAVAS, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1, SRI.K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN FOR R2 TO R4

¶28

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

Crl.MC.No.544 OF 2019(G)

¶30

¶31

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶32

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶33

Crl.M.C. No.544 of 2019

¶34

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

¶35

Dated this the 2^nd day of September, 2019

¶36

O R D E R

¶37

Petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 to 3 in the impugned Anx-I FIR in Crime No.512/2017 of Varantharappilly Police Station, Thrissur district, registered for offences punishable under Sec.174 of the Indian Penal Code, which has led to the institution of Anx-II Final Report in C.C. No.2555/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioners and the respondents have been settled amicably and that the respondents 2 to 4 have sworn to Anxs.III, IV and V affidavits respectively before this Court, wherein it is stated that she has settled the entire disputes with the petitioners and that they have no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioners have preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with the prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against them.

¶38

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

¶39

Crl.MC.No.544 OF 2019(G)

¶40

¶41

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.

¶42

Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the impugned Anx-I FIR in Crime No.512/2017 of Varantharappilly Police Station, Thrissur district, which has led to the institution of Anx-II Final Report in C.C. No.2555/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda, and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against accused Nos.1 to 3 will stand quashed. The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below concerned. Office of Advocate General will forward copy of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information.

¶43

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

¶44

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

¶45

SKS

¶46

Crl.MC.No.544 OF 2019(G)

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX

¶49

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶50

ANNEXURE I A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 512 OF 2017 DATED 31.8.2017 OF THE VARANTHARAPPILLY POLICE STATION

¶51

ANNEXURE II A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 512 OF 2017 DATED 29.1.2017 OF THE VARANTHARAPPILLY POLICE STATION

¶52

ANNEXURE III AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.2019 REGARDING SETTLEMENT ANNEXURE IV AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.2019 REGARDING SETTLEMENT

¶53

ANNEXURE V AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.2019 REGARDING SETTLEMENT

Suresh, v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sooraj@Kunjan Vs State of Kerala

Purushan, Vs Arya

Devassy @ Rajan Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Biju Mathew Vs the State of Kerala

N.Lathesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala