Allowed

Vincent Joseph v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Oct 2020Crl.MC/4097/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed the FIR in a case under Section 116(d) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011. The court relied on the third respondent’s affidavit stating the dispute was settled amicably, noting that continuing proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The Crl.M.C. is allowed; the FIR No.711/2016 and associated proceedings at East Kallada Police Station are quashed.

Vincent Joseph 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 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.4097 OF 2020(B)

¶6

CRIME NO.711/2016 OF East Kallada Police Station , Kollam

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:

¶8

1 VINCENT JOSEPH

¶9

AGED 50 YEARS

¶10

S/O.JOSEPH, 'DASALIN' HOUSE, THANKASSERI MURI, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM - 691 007 (1ST ACCUSED)

¶11

2 MANILAL

¶12

AGED 60 YEARS

¶13

S/O.NATARAJAN, THARAVATTATH VEEDU, PERUMON PADINJARE MURI, PANAYAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM (2ND ACCUSED)

¶14

3 JOY

¶15

AGED 54 YEARS S/O.SILVESTER, JOY SADANAM, NEAR VELLIMON PLAMUKK, CHERUMOOD CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 601

¶16

BY ADVS.

¶17

SRI.C.R.JAYAKUMAR SRI.NOBEL RAJU

¶18

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS:

¶19

1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031

¶20

2 THE SHO

¶21

EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, 691 502

¶22

3 RADHAKRISHNAN AGED 53 YEARS S/O.SIVASANKARAN NAIR, MACHINAZHIKATHU VEEDU, KOIKKAL BHAGOM, PERUVELIKKARA P.O., WEST KALLADA VILLAGE, KOLLAM 690 540

¶23

R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.K.PRADEEP

¶24

SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

Crl.MC.No.4097 OF 2020(B) ..2..

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Dated this the 28th day of October 2020

¶29

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.711/2016

¶30

registered at the East Kallada Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 116(d) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the 3^rd respondent. Annexure-A3 affidavit has been filed by 3^rd respondent stating that the dispute, which was the reason for the incident and registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably and he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

Crl.MC.No.4097 OF 2020(B) ..3..

¶34

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.

¶35

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. AnnexureA1 FIR and the proceedings in Crime No.711/2016 registered at the East Kallada Police Station is quashed.

¶36

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶37

SB/28/10/2020

¶38

Crl.MC.No.4097 OF 2020(B) ..4..

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶41

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.711/2016 OF EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN FIR NO.711/2016 OF EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 06.09.2020.

¶42

//true copy// P.A to Judge

Vincent Joseph v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vincent Joseph 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

Rajith Vs State of Kerala

Silpa v.Kumar Ifs, Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Joushan Vs the State of Kerala

Naseem O.T. Vs State of Kerala

Anuja .T. Vs State of Kerala

Mohandas C. Vs Sub Inspector of Police