Quashed

Jabir, v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Sept 2020Crl.MC/2958/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous application filed by accused to quash the FIR in Crime No.416/2020 due to amicable settlement. The High Court, disposing of the matter in view of settled nature and lack of public interest, granted the relief by quashing the criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Miscellaneous case allowed; proceedings in annexure A FIR in Crime No. 416 of 2020 registered at Kondotty Police Station quashed.

Jabir, 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

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

¶5

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶6

CRIME NO.416/2020 OF Kondotty Police Station , Malappuram

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 JABIR, AGED 37 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMED BAVA, MULLUNGAL, KUMBALAPOTTA HOUSE, KALOTH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

2 MOHAMMED BAVA AGED 86 YEARS S/O.KUNJIPERI, MULLUNGAL HOUSE, KALOTH, KONDOTTY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

3 SHAREEF P. AGED 28 YEARS S/O.KAMMAD, KUMBLAPOTTA HOUSE, KALOTH, KONDOTTY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682031.

¶14

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 638.

¶15

3 NOUSHIK, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, MULLUNGAL HOUSE, KALOTH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 638.

¶16

4 MUHAMMED SHIHAB, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.ASHARAF, MULLUNGAL HOUSE,

¶17

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶18

-2-

¶19

KALOTH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 638.

¶20

5 SHAMEEL, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, MULLUNGAL HOUSE, KALOTH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -673 638.

¶21

6 FARHAN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.ASHARAF, MULLUNGAL HOUSE, KALOTH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 638.

¶22

R3-6 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN

¶23

OTHER PRESENT:

¶24

SR.PP.AMJAD ALI

¶25

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

¶26

THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶28

-3-

¶29

ORDER

¶30

Dated this the 17^th day of September, 2020

¶31

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 416 of 2020 registered at the Kondotty Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), 392, 506 r/w 34 of IPC. The de facto complainants, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as respondents 3 to 6. Annexures C to E affidavits have been filed by respondents 3 to 6 stating that the dispute which led to registration of the crime, have been settled amicably and they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners.

¶32

2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,

¶33

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

¶34

3. Having considered the gravity of the

¶35

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶36

-4-

¶37

offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the respondents 3 to 6, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the matter has been amicably settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, there is no possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction. 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.

¶38

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The

¶39

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶40

-5-

¶41

proceedings in Annexure A FIR in Crime No. 416 of 2020 registered at the Kondotty Police Station is

¶42

quashed.

¶43

Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶44

Scl/17.09.2020

¶45

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶46

-6-

¶47

APPENDIX

¶48

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶49

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.LR. AND F.I.S. IN CRIME NO.416/2020 OF THE KONDOTTY POLICE STATION DT. 26/5/2020.

¶50

ANNEXURE B THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12/6/2020.

¶51

ANNEXURE C THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 12/6/2020.

¶52

ANNEXURE D THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 12/6/2020.

¶53

ANNEXURE E THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED, 12/6/2020.

¶54

Crl.MC.No.2958 OF 2020(H)

¶55

-7-

Jabir, v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jabir, 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

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

Godson George Vs State of Kerala