Allowed

Arjun.R.M v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Dec 2020Crl.MC/1321/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed proceedings under IPC and IT Act against the petitioners. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the court held that since the dispute was settled and no public interest remained, continuing trials would amount to an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition was allowed, and proceedings in Crime No. 1513 of 2016 were quashed.

Arjun.R.M Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.1321 OF 2020(E)

¶6

CRIME NO.1513/2016 OF Vadakara Police Station , Kozhikode

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

ARJUN.R.M AGED 23 YEARS S/O. BABU, RAROTH MEETHAI (KIZHAKKAYIL MEETHAL) HOUSE, KUTTOTH P.O. KOZHIKODE).

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

SRI.S.K.ADHITHYAN SMT.KEERTHI S. JYOTHI

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

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

¶13

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VATAKARA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE 673 101.

¶14

3 ANJU

¶15

D/O. JANARDHANAN, RESIDING AT THARAVATTAM KUNIYIL, KIZHAL P.O. KUTOOTH, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE 673 103.

¶16

R3 BY ADV. SRI.GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN

¶17

SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Crl.MC.No.1321 OF 2020(E)

¶20

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Dated this the 11th day of December 2020

¶23

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 1513 of 2016 registered at the Vadakara Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 354(A)(iv), 354(D)(1)(ii) of IPC and Section 67, 67(a) of IT Act. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered is arrayed as the 3^rd respondent. Annexure-II affidavit has been filed by the 3^rd respondent stating that the dispute, which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and that she has no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶24

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.

¶25

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, and having perused the affidavit filed by the 3^rd respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am

¶26

Crl.MC.No.1321 OF 2020(E)

¶27

¶28

satisfied that the dispute is settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief sought.

¶29

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in Annexure A1-FIR and all proceedings in Crime No. 1513 of 2016 of Vatakara Police Station Vatakara is quashed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

AJ/11.12.2020

Crl.MC.No.1321 OF 2020(E)

¶35

¶36

APPENDIX

¶37

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶38

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO. 1513/2016 DATED 03.11.2016 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE II AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10.01. 2020. ANNEXURE II AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 10.01. 2020.

Arjun.R.M v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun.R.M 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

Gafoor, Vs the State of Kerala

Vinu Mon a. Vs State of Kerala

Shabeer Kaithavalappil Vs the State of Kerala

Antony C.T., Vs Sony P.J.

K.Muralidharan Vs State of Kerala

Rasheed Vs State of Kerala