Allowed

Biju v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Oct 2020Crl.MC/3043/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed proceedings in Crime No.130/2020. The court noted the dispute was settled by the de facto complainant via affidavit, injuries were minor, and the accused had no criminal antecedents, finding no public interest in continuing the case.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in Crime No.130 of 2020 registered at the Kottiyam Police Station are quashed.

Biju 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 22ND ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.3043 OF 2020(A)

¶6

CRIME NO.130/2020 OF Kottiyam Police Station , Kollam

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :

¶8

BIJU, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.SIVAPRASAD, CHARUVILA PUTHENVEEDU, MYLAPURE, UMAYANALLORE P.O., THAZHUTHALA, KOLLAM, KERALA-691589.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.N.MANU THAMPI

¶10

RESPONDENTS/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT :

¶11

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

¶12

2 SULFIKKAR,

¶13

AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.ASSANARU KUNJU, RESIDING AT THE HOUSE OWNED BY MUTHALUVILA JAFFER, VAYALIL PUTHEN VEEDU, NORTH OF VILAKKU KULAM, PUTHUCHIRA CHERI, THAZHUTHALA, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691589.

¶14

SRI. C.S.HRITHWIK, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crmc 3043/2020

V.G.ARUN, J.

=========================== Crl.M.C.No.3043 of 2020

¶20

=========================== Dated this the 14^th day of October, 2020

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.130 of 2020 registered at the Kottiyam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 324, 308, 506 of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is the 2^nd respondent. Even though the petitioner is alleged to have inflicted injuries with a sword, the wound certificate reveals that the defacto complainant had only suffered minor injuries. Annexure A2 affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondent stating that the dispute is resolved and that he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner.

¶23

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

¶24

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the 2^nd respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the

¶25

Crmc 3043/2020

¶26

¶27

dispute is settled and that 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 no impediment in granting the relief sought.

¶28

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in Crime No.130 of 2020 registered at the Kottiyam Police

¶29

Station is quashed.

¶30

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

lgk

Crmc 3043/2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S ANNEXURES :

¶36

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.130/2020 REGISTERED IN THE KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION DATED 22.02.2020. ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT IN ORIGINAL FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 18.05.2020. ANNEXURE A3: THE WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ISSUED FROM THE DISTRICT HOSPITAL, KOLLAM DATED 21/02/2020.

¶37

RESPONDENT'S/S ANNEXURES : NIL

Biju v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeen Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Hanis S.K., Vs the State of Kerala

Raju Vs the State of Kerala

Satheesan Vs State of Kerala

P.H.Kabeer Vs State of Kerala

Roshan S.R. Vs State of Kerala