Allowed

Saddam Hussain v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jun 2019Crl.MC/913/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The court cited the settlement of disputes, acquittal of a co-accused, and lack of grave injuries or public interest to determine that the continuation of the trial was futile.

What did the court decide?

The final report and all further proceedings pending as LPC No.37 of 2016 against the petitioner were quashed.

Saddam Hussain Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 913 of 2019

¶6

IN LPC NO.37/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD

¶7

CRIME NO.583/2014 OF MANJESWAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

SADDAM HUSSAIN, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMAD, RES. AT PUCHATHAVAYAL, BADAJE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON

¶11

SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI

¶12

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA, REP RESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶14

2 ABDUL HAMEED, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.PALLIKUNHI, R/AT PUCHATHAVAYAL, BADAJE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT-671129.

¶15

BY ADV. P.V.LOHITHAKSHAN

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAMESH CHAND

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

CRL.MC:913/2019

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

¶23

The petitioner herein is the 1^st accused in Crime No.583 of 2014 registered at the Manjeshwar Police Station alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 341, 427, 506(ii) r/w. Section 34 of the IPC. After completion of the investigation, final report was laid before the learned Magistrate and the case was taken cognizance and was numbered as C.C. No.1060 of 2014. Since the petitioner was not available for trial, the case against him was split up and removed to the list of Long Pending Cases. The same is now pending as LPC No.37 of 2016 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasaragod.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the learned Magistrate by judgment dated 11.03.2019 in C.C. No.22 of 2017, has acquitted the 2^nd accused. It is further submitted that thereafter, the entire disputes have been settled out of court and the de facto complainant has filed an affidavit asserting that he has no further grievance. In view of the acquittal of co-accused and as the disputes have been amicably resolved, the continuance of proceedings is a futile exercise, submits the learned counsel.

¶25

CRL.MC:913/2019

¶26

¶27

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the investigating officer has reported that no other crimes are registered against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the State has no serious objection in quashing the proceedings as no public interest is involved.

¶28

I have considered the submissions advanced and have perused the records. The records do not reveal that any serious injuries were sustained by the victims. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victims and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat [2017 (12) SCALE 187]. Furthermore, the proceedings against the 2^nd accused ended in acquittal as he refused to speak anything about the incident, which took place on 10.09.2014.

¶29

Having considered the submissions advanced and after perusing the records, it appears that the offences are entirely personal in nature and do not affect public peace or tranquility. The injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioner cannot be said to be grave and

¶30

CRL.MC:913/2019

¶31

¶32

serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It is also felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace. In a case such as the instant one, even if the prosecution is allowed to continue, it would not serve any purpose as the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It can only result in putting the victim and the accused to unwanted oppression and prejudice. Settlement will augur well for the interest of the community and will enable the parties to live in peace and harmony.

¶33

In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1 final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as LPC No.37 of 2016 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasaragod are quashed.

¶34

SD/-

¶35

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶36

KRJ

¶37

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

CRL.MC:913/2019

APPENDIX

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:-

¶42

ANNEXURE-A1:- THE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT.

¶43

ANNEXURE-A2:- AFFIDAVIT

¶44

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:-NIL

Saddam Hussain v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam Hussain 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

Shiju K.V Vs State of Kerala

N.Surendran Vs State of Kerala

Anju Varghese Vs State of Kerala

U.Gopakumar, Vs State of Kerala

Aniyan Koshy Vs State of Kerala

Fr.Paul Thelekkat Vs the State of Kerala