Allowed

Hanis S.K., v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Oct 2020Crl.MC/2176/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Honourable High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed criminal proceedings instituted against petitioners and the de facto complainant, wherein the dispute had been amicably settled, finding no public interest involved and continuation of proceedings as an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in C.P.No.1/2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kannur are quashed.

Hanis S.K., Vs the State of Kerala — 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

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 21ST ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.2176 OF 2020(B)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CP 1/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KANNUR

¶7

CRIME NO.447/2019 OF Kannur City Police Station , Kannur

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 HANIS S.K., AGED 26 YEARS S/O FAYIS, SEKKALI HOUSE, NEAR KOCHI PALLI, P.O.THAYYIL, KANNUR, PIN-670003.

¶10

2 RIZWIN,

¶11

AGED 26 YEARS

¶12

S/O NOORUDHEEN, NOORINI JANNATH NAGAR, KODAPARAMBA, KANNUR-6700012.

¶13

3 MUHAMMED RAYEES K.T, AGED 24 YEARS

¶14

S/O ABDULLA, K.T.HOUSE, KANNUR CITY, P.O.THAYYIL , KANNUR PIN-670003.

¶15

4 JASEEM ABOOBACKER,

¶16

S/O ABOOBACKER, C.H.BEEVI NIVAS, KANNUR CITY, NEAR TAXI STAND, KANNUR-670011.

¶17

5 RAHIL O.K, AGED 23 YEARS S/O RASHEED, O.K.BAZZIL, OTTAMAVU ROAD, P.O.THANA, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670012.

¶18

6 MUHAMMED ASHKAR M.K, AGED 28 YEARS

¶19

S/O HANEEFA, RESIDING AT M.K.HOUSE, NEAR CITY JUMA MASJID P.O.THAYYIL, KANNUR-670003.

¶20

7 THAMEERUL AJAS, AGED 28 YEARS S/O LATE SALI, SOOPIYARATH HOUSE, NEAR KANNUR CITY, PIN-670011.

¶21

8 MUHAMMED ANEES, AGED 28 YEARS

¶22

Crl.MC.No.2176 OF 2020(B) ..2..

¶23

S/O NOORUDHEEN, RESIDING AT KULIRMA APARTMENT, NEERCHAL, KANNUR-670012.

¶24

BY ADVS. SRI.ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) SRI.PRAJIT RATNAKARAN SHRI. RAJ CAROLIN V.

¶25

RESPONDENT/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶26

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

¶27

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION, KANNUR-670011.

¶28

3 JAMSHEER T.M AGED 36 YEARS S/O JAMAL B.V, RESIDING AT BAITHUL JAMSHAI, NALUVAYAL, BANGALI MOHALLA, SNEHATHEERAM, P.O.KANNUR CITY, KANNUR, PIN-670 003.

¶29

OTHER PRESENT:

¶30

SR.PP.AMJAD ALI

¶31

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

Crl.MC.No.2176 OF 2020(B) ..3..

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Dated this the 13th day of October 2020

¶35

Petitioners are the sole accused in Crime No.447/2019 registered at the Kannur Police Station, for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 452, 427, 308 r/w 149 of IPC, now pending as C.P.No.1/2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kannur. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the 3^rd respondent. Annexure-A2 affidavit has been filed by 3^rd respondent and Annexure-A3 affidavit by the other injured person, stating that the reason for the incident, which led to registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably and they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner.

¶36

Crl.MC.No.2176 OF 2020(B) ..4..

¶37

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,

¶38

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

¶39

Having considered the gravity of the offences

¶40

alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the the 3^rd 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 [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is

¶41

Crl.MC.No.2176 OF 2020(B) ..5..

¶42

no impediment in granting the relief sought.

¶43

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.P.No.1/2020 on the files of the

¶44

Judicial First Class Magistrate CourtII, Kannur is quashed.

¶45

SB/14/10/2020

¶46

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶47

Crl.MC.No.2176 OF 2020(B) ..6..

¶48

APPENDIX

¶49

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶50

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 447/2019 OF KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION, KANNUR ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE INJURED DTD.17.9.2020

¶51

//true copy //

¶52

P.A to Judge

Hanis S.K., v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanis S.K., 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

Capt. Paul Erinjeri Vs State of Kerala

Aswin K. Vs State of Kerala

Safvana Vs Rasiya

Jeen Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Raju Vs the State of Kerala

Sulaiman a @ Abbas Salim Vs State of Kerala