Allowed

Rafeeq v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Nov 2020Crl.MC/4533/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, Justice V.G.Arun quashed the proceedings against the petitioner after finding that the dispute was settled by the parties and no public interest was involved. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on abuse of process, the court granted relief as possible conviction was remote.

What did the court decide?

This Crl.M.C. is allowed and the proceedings in S.C.No.518 of 2019 on the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Vatakara are quashed.

Rafeeq 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

TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 26TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.4533 OF 2020(F)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC 518/2019 OF ASST.SESSIONS COURT, VATAKARA CRIME NO.68/2018 OF Valayam Police Station , Kozhikode

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

RAFEEQ AGED 31 YEARS S/O.POKKER, KOTTAPPOYIL HOUSE, CHEKKIYAD P.O., KURUVANTHERI, KOZHIKODE-673 509.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.ROSHINI UDAYAKUMAR

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

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

¶12

2 ABDUL ASEEZ

¶13

AGED 47 YEARS

¶14

S/O.MAYAN HAJI, PUNNARATH HOUSE, CHEKKIYAD P.O., VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673 509.

¶15

3 DINESHAN

¶16

AGED 37 YEARS S/O.KANARAN, NHALIYOTTUMEL HOUSE, CHEKKIYAD P.O., VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673 509.

¶17

R2-3 BY ADV. RANJITH E N

¶18

SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crmc 4533/2020

V.G.ARUN, J.

=========================== Crl.M.C.No.4533 of 2020

¶24

=========================== Dated this the 17^th day of November, 2020

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.68 of 2018 registered at the Valayam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 323, 324, 308, 506 r/w 149 of IPC , now pending as S.C.No.518 of 2019 on the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Vatakara. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered is the 2^nd respondent. Annexure A3 affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondent and Annexure A4 has been filed by the 3^rd respondent, stating that the dispute is resolved, and that they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner. As far as accused 1 to 4 are concerned, this court, by order in Crl.M.C.No.4518 of 2020 has already quashed the proceedings against them.

¶27

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

¶28

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged,

¶29

nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed

¶30

Crmc 4533/2020

¶31

¶32

by 2^nd and 3^rd respondents, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the 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

¶33

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

¶35

S.C.No.518 of 2019 on the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Vatakara is quashed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

lgk

Crmc 4533/2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶43

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.68/2018 OF VALAYAM STATION, KOZHIKODE RURAL. ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.68/2018 BEFORE THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, NADAPURAM. ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Rafeeq v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rafeeq 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

Sanoop Vs State of Kerala

Mini Avikkal Vs State of Kerala

Sreedharan Ambliyadan Vs State of Kerala

Babu Vs the State of Kerala

Abdul Hakkeem Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Vijayan P.K. Vs State of Kerala