Allowed

Ajith.S.Nair @ Kannan, v. Rajan

Kerala HC7 Oct 2020Crl.MC/1995/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed pending criminal proceedings. The court found that the dispute leading to the FIR was settled amicably, no grievance subsisted, and continued proceedings would amount to an abuse of process given the remote possibility of conviction.

What did the court decide?

This Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in S.C.No.123/2019 are quashed.

Ajith.S.Nair @ Kannan, Vs Rajan — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 15TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.1995 OF 2020(H)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 123/2019 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - II, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

CRIME NO.1219/2016 OF Pulikeezhu Police Station , Pathanamthitta

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 AJITH.S.NAIR @ KANNAN, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.SIVAKUMAR, NADAKKAVIL HOUSE, PARUMALA MURI, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PALACHUVADU, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶10

2 RAJESH KUMAR

¶11

AGED 41 YEARS S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, CHAKKALAYIL HOUSE, NEAR ALUMOOD TEMPLE PARUMALA MURI KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶12

3 JIJITH KUMAR @ LALLU AGED 30 YEARS S/O.JENARDHANAN, VADAKKE HOUSE, PARUMALA MURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶13

4 SAJIVE KUMAR

¶14

AGED 37 YEARS

¶15

S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN KURUP, KATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARUMAL AMURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶16

5 UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 27 YEARS S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, GOKULAM, PARUMALA MURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶17

6 REGHU

¶18

AGED 27 YEARS S/O.RAGHAVAN, UZHATHILETHU HOUSE, PARUMALA MURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶19

Crl.MC.No.1995 OF 2020(H) ..2..

¶20

7 PRADEEP

¶21

AGED 28 YEARS S/O.RAJENDRAN PRENAVAM HOUSE, PARUMALA MURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶22

8 OMANAKUTTAN

¶23

AGED 29 YEARS S/O.GOPI, KUNNUPURATH HOUSE, PARUMALA MURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶24

9 SANTHOHS, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.GOPI, KUNUPURATH HOUSE, PARUMALA MURI, THRUKKAPPUZHA, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶25

BY ADV. SRI.AJEESH K.SASI

¶26

RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE:

¶27

1 RAJAN

¶28

AGED 48 YEARS

¶29

S/O.THIRUVAN, MANIPPUZHATHOPPIL HOUSE, RUBBER THOTTAM JUNCTION, PARUMALA MURI, KADAPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689626

¶30

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶31

R1 BY ADV. UNNI SEBASTIAN KAPPEN

¶32

OTHER PRESENT:

¶33

SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶34

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

Crl.MC.No.1995 OF 2020(H) ..3..

¶36

ORDER

¶37

Dated this the 7th day of October 2020

¶38

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1219/2016 registered at the Pulikeezhu Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 308 and 323 of IPC, now pending as S.C.No.123/2019 on the files of the Additional District and Sessions Court-II, Pathanamthitta. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the 1^st respondent. Annexure-C affidavit has been filed by 1^st respondent stating that the reason for the incident, which led to registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably, and he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners.

¶39

Crl.MC.No.1995 OF 2020(H) ..4..

¶40

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,

¶41

who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.

¶42

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the 1^st respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and 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

¶43

Crl.MC.No.1995 OF 2020(H) ..5..

¶44

[(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief sought.

¶45

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in S.C.No.123/2019 on the files of the Additional District and Sessions Court-II, Pathanamthitta is quashed.

¶46

SB/07/10/2020

¶47

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶48

Crl.MC.No.1995 OF 2020(H) ..6..

¶49

APPENDIX

¶50

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶51

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING SHEET IN S.C.NO.123/2019 OF THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE-II, PATHANAMTHITTA ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1219/2016 OF PULIKEEZHU POLICE STATION

¶52

ANNEXURE C THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE CW1/1ST RESPONDENT SIGNIFYING THE FACTUM OF SETTLEMENT COMPOSITION OF THE DISPUTES WITH THE PETITIONERS

¶53

//true copy// P.A to Judge

Ajith.S.Nair @ Kannan, v. Rajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajith.S.Nair @ Kannan, v. Rajan

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

Jeeshma.P., Vs Rajeevan.K.P.

V.Salahudheen Ayoobi, Vs the State of Kerala

V.Salahudheen Ayoob Vs the State of Kerala

Abdul Azeez Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Salman Vs State of Kerala

Veerankutty Vs the State of Kerala