Allowed

Raju v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Oct 2020Crl.MC/3460/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed a Criminal Miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in a complaint case involving offences under Sections 447 and 427 r/w 34 of IPC. The Court held that since the dispute was settled amicably and no public interest was involved, continuance of proceedings would amount to an abuse of process of court.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed; the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.1817/2014 are quashed.

Raju 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.3460 OF 2020(B)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 1817/2014 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOTTARAKKARA

¶7

CRIME NO.124/2014 OF Kottarakkara Police Station , Kollam

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 AND 2:

¶9

1 RAJU

¶10

ITTY OMMEN, RESIDING AT MULLASSERIPUTHENVEEDU, CHENGAMANAD MURI, MELILA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691508.

¶11

2 JOLLYMON

¶12

S/O. MATHAI, RESIDING AT HARITHAM, CHENGAMANAD MURI, MELILA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691508.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJESH(PULLIKADA)

¶14

RESPONDENT/STATE / DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶15

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,

¶16

2 GEORGE S/O. ITTY OMMEN, RESIDING AT MULLASERIPUTHENVEEDU, CHENGAMANAD MURI, MELILA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT- 691509.

¶17

R2 BY ADV. S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SR.PP.AMJAD ALI

¶20

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

¶21

Crl.MC.No.3460 OF 2020(B) ..2..

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Dated this the 13th day of October 2020

¶24

Petitioners are the accused in Crime

¶25

No.124/2014 registered at the Kottarakara Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 447 and 427 r/w 34 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.1817/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kottarakara. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the 2^nd respondent. Annexure-A2 affidavit has been filed by 2^nd respondent stating that the reason for the incident, which led to registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably and he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner.

¶26

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners

¶27

Crl.MC.No.3460 OF 2020(B) ..3..

¶28

have no criminal antecedents.

¶29

Having considered the gravity of the offences

¶30

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 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 no impediment in granting the relief sought.

¶31

Crl.MC.No.3460 OF 2020(B) ..4..

¶32

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.1817/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kottarakara

¶33

is quashed.

¶34

SB/13/10/2020

¶35

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶36

Crl.MC.No.3460 OF 2020(B) ..5..

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR NO.124/14 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION.

¶40

ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AND CONNECTED DOCUMENTS IN CRIME NO. 124/14 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION,

¶41

ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT

¶42

//true copy// P.A to Judge

Raju v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju 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

Hanis S.K., Vs the State of Kerala

Sulaiman a @ Abbas Salim Vs State of Kerala