Allowed

Godson George v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Sept 2020Crl.MC/2260/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the Kerala High Court granted leave to the petitioners to file their complainants (de facto complainants) which had settled the underlying dispute. Considering the settlement and absence of public interest, the court invoked the legal position established by Supreme Court precedents to quash the pending criminal proceedings. The court ordered the case be allow

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in C.C.No.336 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, North Paravoor is quashed.

Godson George Vs 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

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 26TH BHADRA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.2260 OF 2020(B)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 336/2018 OF JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,NORTH PARAVUR (TEMPORARY)

¶7

CRIME NO.537/2018 OF Varappuzha Police Station , Ernakulam

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 GODSON GEORGE AGED 30 YEARS S/O. ALEX GEORGE, KADAVIL HOUSE, PIZHALA P.O. KADAMAKUDY VILLAGE, PIN-682 027, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶10

2 JOFFIN M.JOSEPH AGED 35 YEARS S/O.M.V.JOSEPH MATHIRAPILLY HOUSE, PIZHALA P.O. KADAMAKUDY VILLAGE, PIN-682 027, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.ABHILASH JOSE

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM-682 031

¶14

2 VIDYASAGAR

¶15

S/O. VENKIDESWARAN, DEVASAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PIZHALA , KADAMAKUDY VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 027,

¶16

3 PRAVEEN S/O. GOPI, DEVASAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PIZHALA , KADAMAKUDY VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 027,

¶17

R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.V.S.NEENESHKUMAR

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SR.PP.AMJAD ALI

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

CRL.MC.2260/2020

¶22

¶23

V.G.ARUN, J.

¶24

CRL.M.C.No. 2260 of 2020

¶25

Dated this the 17^th day of September, 2020

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 537 of 2018 registered at the Varapuzha Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324 read with 34 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No. 336 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, North Paravoor. The de facto complainants, at whose instance the crime was registered, are arrayed as respondents 2 and 3. Annexures 3 and 3(a) affidavits have been filed by the said respondents stating that the dispute, which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and that they have no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶28

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that as against the 1^st petitioner, there are other criminal cases.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by Annexures 4 and 5 orders passed by this Court, the other criminal cases against the 1^st petitioner were quashed, based on the settlement arrived at with the de facto complainants.

¶30

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by respondents 2 and 3, the contents of which are submitted to be true

¶31

CRL.MC.2260/2020

¶32

¶33

and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. The fact that the other criminal cases against the 1^st petitioner were quashed by this Court also a relevant factor. 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.

¶34

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.336 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, North Paravoor is quashed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN, JUDGE

vgs

CRL.MC.2260/2020

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX

¶41

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶42

ANNEXURE-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.537/2018 OF VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT DATED 10.08.2018

¶43

ANNEXURE-2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.537/2018 OF VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT ANNEXURE-3 ORIGINAL OF AFFIDAVITS DATED SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ANNEXURE 3A ORIGINAL OF AFFIDAVITS DATED SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ANNEXURE 4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C.NO.8535/2018 DATED 13/12/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. ANNEXURE 5: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C.NO.1643/2019 DATED 18/03/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Godson George v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Godson George 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anish, Vs State of Kerala

Shefeek Vs State of Kerala

Shefeek.S Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Vipin O. Vs State of Kerala

Jabir, Vs the State of Kerala