Allowed

Shanil, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Feb 2020Crl.MC/2226/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal quashing petition filed by an accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against an FIR and Final Report. The High Court accepted the settlement and the complainant's condonation of the offence, holding no public interest was involved, and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

A1 FIR and A2 Final Report quashed; further proceedings in C.C.2732/2014 against petitioner are stayed.

Shanil, Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 18TH MAGHA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.2226 OF 2019(G)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 2732/2014 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III,THRISSUR

¶7

CRIME NO.530/2014 OF Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

SHANIL, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.SHAJI, BRARTH HOUSE, CHARDAM NAYARANGADY DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.VINAY RAMDAS SMT.K.B.ANAMIKA

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION (THRISSUR DISTRICT) THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

2 SAJITHA, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.VISHWAN, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, NAYARANGADU DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR - 680 651.

¶14

R1. BY M.N.MAYA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY ADV. SRI.VISHNUPRASAD NAIR

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

Crl.MC.No.2226 OF 2019(G)

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Dated this the 7th day of February 2020

¶20

Petitioner is the accused in C.C.2732/2014 of

¶21

the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (JFCM), No.III, Thrissur.

¶22

The prosecution case is that on 26.03.2014 at 6.00 Hrs, the accused had recorded video in his mobile phone while the 2^nd respondent was taking a

¶23

bath at her residence and thereby committed the

¶24

offence punishable under Section 354(c) of the IPC read with Section 119(b) of the K.P.Act.

¶25

After the investigation, final report was submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Mannuthy

¶26

Police Station as Annexure A2 before the JFCM No.III, Thrissur.

¶27

The learned Judicial Magistrate took

¶28

cognizance the offence aforesaid and issued summons to the accused. Pursuant thereto, the entire matter

¶29

Crl.MC.No.2226 OF 2019(G)

¶30

was settled between the parties in the presence of

¶31

their family members and mediators. The 2^nd respondent, who is the defacto complainant in

¶32

Annexure A2, filed Annexure A3 affidavit before this

¶33

Court stating that the 2^nd respondent has no substantive grievance against the petitioner. In the circumstance, the petitioner has filed this Crl.M.C under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C seeking to quash Annexure A1 FIR and Annexure A2 final report.

¶34

counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Vishnuprasad Nair, the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent and Smt. M.N.Maya, learned Public Prosecutor for the 1^st respondent.

¶35

entire matter has been settled between the 1^st

¶36

petitioner and the 2^nd respondent. On a perusal of Annexure A1 and A2 it is clear that, no public

¶37

interest is involved. The main allegation is that the accused captured the video of a woman engaged in private act as defined under Section 354(c) of the

¶38

Crl.MC.No.2226 OF 2019(G)

¶39

IPC. The 2^nd respondent, who is the defacto

¶40

complainant herself has condoned the act and she has filed Annexure A3 affidavit before this Court.

¶41

Annexures A1 and A2 proceedings is mere wastage of time and energy. Further, the grievance is that 2^nd respondent is purely personal in nature.

¶42

In the result, the Crl.M.C stands allowed. All further proceedings in C.C.2732/2014 of the JFCM No.III, Thrissur arising out of Crime No.530/2014 of the Mannuthy Police Station pursuant to Annexures A1

¶43

and A2 initiated against the petitioner stand quashed.

Sd/-

N.ANIL KUMAR

JUDGE

hmh

Crl.MC.No.2226 OF 2019(G)

¶50

APPENDIX

¶51

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶52

ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ALONG WITH FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT IN THIS CASE DATED 26/03/2014 IN CRIME 530/2014 OF MANNUTHY POLICE STATION IN THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶53

ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT DATED 31/03/2014 IN ANNEXURE A1 F.I.R. ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT MADE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/02/2019.

¶54

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

Shanil, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanil, 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

Abdurahiman Vs the State of Kerala

Dr. Radha Mohanan Vs M/S. Parasyavedi Advertising Company

Chandrabose Vs State of Kerala

V.Narakathara Vs Elsamma Sunny and Another

K.Raghunathan S/O Govindan Vs Musthafa S/O Hassankutty

P. Surendran Vs State of Kerala