Allowed

Muhammed Jaffar K.A. @ Jappu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Nov 2019Crl.MC/6526/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous case under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Kerala allowed the petition to quash criminal proceedings alleging theft and cheating. The Court held that since the accused had no criminal antecedents, the matter was settled with the victim, and seven years had lapsed making prosecution futile, the proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.2679/2013 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod are quashed.

Muhammed Jaffar K.A. @ Jappu 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 R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.6526 OF 2019(E)

¶6

CC 2679/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-i, KASARAGOD CRIME NO.385/2012 OF Badiadka Police Station, Kasargod

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 MUHAMMED JAFFAR K.A. @ JAPPU AGED 25 YEARS S/O.ABDULLA, SUHARA MANZIL, BAPPALIPPONAM HOUSE, KUNTIKKANA POST, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD.

¶9

2 SAHAB.B.M AGED 26 YEARS S/O.IBRAHIM, BAPPALIPOONAM HOUSE, KUNTIKKANA

¶10

POST, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD.

¶11

3 ABDUL AZEEZ.B.M AGED 30 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMED, BAPPALIPPONAM HOUSE, KUNTIKKANA POST, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD.

¶12

4 SAMSUDDEEN.G.A AGED 28 YEARS S/O.ABDUK RAHMAN, CHEEMULLAHOUSE, ARIYAPPADY.P.O, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI

¶14

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶15

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, HIGH COURT .P.O., ERNAKULAM-682031

¶16

Crl.M.C.No.6526/2019

¶17

¶18

2 ABDULLA .C.K AGED 50 YEARS S/O.KUNHAHAMMED, CHENNAKUND HOUSE, KUNTIKKANA.P.O., NEERCHAL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671551

¶19

R2 BY ADV.SMT.M.M.BABY SMT V SREEJA-PP

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06.11.2019, THE COURT ON 08.11.2019 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.6526/2019

¶22

¶23

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, J

¶24

************************ Crl.M.C.No.6526 of 2019

¶25

Dated this the 8^th day of November, 2019

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing

¶28

the proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C.No.2679/2013 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod.

¶29

The petitioners are accused 1 to 4 in the aforesaid case. The offences alleged against them are punishable under Sections 454, 461, 380, 411 and 414 I.P.C.

¶30

The prosecution case is that on 05.08.2012, between 10.00 hours and the noon on that day, the first accused broke open the lock of the kitchen door of the house in which the de

¶31

facto complainant was residing and he committed theft of an

¶32

amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, which was kept in the almirah in the bedroom of the house. It is also alleged that accused 2 to 4

¶33

¶34

Crl.M.C.No.6526/2019

¶35

received Rs.60,000/-, Rs.20,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively from the first accused knowing that it was stolen amount. It is further alleged that the third and the fourth accused had concealed a part of the amount.

¶36

The second respondent is the de facto complainant who is the victim of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. It is submitted that the matter has been settled between him and the petitioners. Therefore, it is prayed that the proceedings against the petitioners in the case may be quashed.

¶37

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the second respondent and also the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶38

I have perused the affidavit filed by the second

¶39

respondent, who has entered appearance through counsel. It is stated in the affidavit filed by him that the matter has been settled between him and the petitioners and that he has got no grievance against the petitioners and also that he has got no objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners. I am satisfied that the settlement arrived at between the parties is

genuine.

Crl.M.C.No.6526/2019

It is true that the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners have got impact on the society. Therefore, it cannot be found that it is a case in which there is no public interest involved. It is not a purely personal matter between the second respondent and the petitioners.

¶44

In spite of the above aspects, I am inclined to allow the prayer for quashing the proceedings against the petitioners for the following reasons: In the first place, the petitioners have got no criminal antecedents. Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has submitted that they were not involved in any other offence. In the second place, in view of the fact that the de facto complainant/victim has settled the matter with the petitioners, there is no likelihood of any conviction against the petitioners in the case. Conducting trial against the petitioners would be a futile exercise. In the third place, the incident had taken place in the year 2012. More than seven years have now lapsed. At this distant point of time, if trial is conducted against the petitioners, there is no likelihood of obtaining the presence of witnesses other than the de facto complainant, resulting in a

¶45

¶46

Crl.M.C.No.6526/2019

¶47

successful prosecution against them.

¶48

Having taken into consideration the aforesaid aspects,

¶49

I find that the proceedings against the petitioners in the case can

¶50

be quashed by invoking the power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶51

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings against the petitioners in the case

¶52

C.C.No.2679/2013 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First

¶53

Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod are hereby quashed.

¶54

(sd/-)

¶55

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE

jsr/07/11/2019

Crl.M.C.No.6526/2019

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶61

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CR.385/2012 OF BADIADKA POLICE STATION

¶62

ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT DATED 06.08.2019 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶63

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶64

TRUE COPY

¶65

PS TO JUDGE

Muhammed Jaffar K.A. @ Jappu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Jaffar K.A. @ Jappu 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

Kalidasan, Vs State of Kerala

Antoney Victor Vs State of Kerala

Soorya Hari.R.S Vs the State of Kerala

Prasad Vs State of Kerala

Sandeep Vs State of Kerala

V.P.Muhammed Haneefa Vs Assistant Labour Officer