Allowed

Omana v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Feb 2020Crl.MC/495/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam quashed criminal proceedings against two accused persons in a case involving alleged offences under Sections 286, 336, and 427 IPC, reading with Section 34 IPC, after finding that the matter was amicably settled by the defacto complainant with no public interest involved.

What did the court decide?

Criminal M.C. allowed, proceedings in CC No.1769/2016 quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., petitioners/accused discharged.

Omana 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 ASHOK MENON

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.495 OF 2020(B)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1769/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-III, ATTINGAL (TEMPORARY)

¶7

CRIME NO.691/2016 OF Kilimanoor Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶9

1 OMANA

¶10

AGED 49 YEARS D/O. SUMATHI, SUKUMARAVILASAM, PAZHAYA CHANDA, PONGANADU, KILIMANNUR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶11

2 ANIL KUMAR AGED 56 YEARS SUKUMARAVILASAM, PAZHAYA CHANDA, PONGANADU, KILIMANNUR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)

¶13

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031

¶15

2 SHAJAHAN

¶16

AGED 52 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED SALI, S.S.MANZIL, THOPPIL ,KILIMANNUR VILLAGE, MULAKKALATHU KAVU P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT (NOW RESIDING AT A.S. MANZIL,MARAVAKKUZHY, THATTATHUMALA P.O., KILIMANNUR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT)

¶17

R2 BY ADV. A.CHANDRA BABU

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

P P - SRI HRITHWIK.C.S (SR)

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC 495/2020

O R D E R

Dated this the 20th day of February 2020

¶25

Petitioners are accused in CC No.1769/2016 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s CourtIII, Attingal for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 286, 336 and 427 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶26

The defacto complainant/aggrieved is the second respondent herein. He has appeared through counsel and filed an affidavit to the effect that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners and that he has no grievance against them. A report to that effect has also been obtained from the investigating officer through the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. The petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents. There is no public interest involved.

¶27

In the result, the Criminal M.C. is allowed and the entire proceedings as against the petitioners herein in CC No.1769/2016 on the files of the Judicial

¶28

Crl.MC 495/2020

¶29

¶30

First Class Magistrate’s Court-III, Attingal shall stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.PC and the petitioners/accused are discharged.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

Crl.MC 495/2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

ANNEXURE-A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO.1769/2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III,ATTINGAL ARISING FROM CRIME NO.691/2016 OF KILIMANNUR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶40

ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Omana v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omana 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lal Ismail, Vs the State of Kerala

Gopikrishnan Vs the Station House Officer

Anand G., Vs State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Abbas, Vs Afsal

Satheesh Kumar Vs Suresh Babu