Allowed

Yahim Varghese v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Dec 2020Crl.MC/5086/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Six accused appearing as petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings in IPL Crime No. 2589/2020 registered for offences under various provisions of the IPC. The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings based on a settlement affidavit filed by the de facto complainant and the finding that no public interest was involved.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the proceedings in Crime No. 2589 of 2020 registered at Thiruvalla Police Station.

Yahim Varghese 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

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.5086 OF 2020(E)

¶6

CRIME NO.2589/2020 OF Thiruvalla Police Station, Pathanamthitta

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 YAHIM VARGHESE AGED 25 YEARS S/O THOMAS P.JOHN,MULAIKAL, THRIKODITHANAM,CHANAGANASERY-686105.

¶9

2 ASWIN ANIL, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.B.ANIL KUMAR,MADAPATT SANDHRAM HOUSE,THRIKODITHANAM,CHANGANASERY-686105.

¶10

3 REGHUPATHY, AGED 23 YEARS

¶11

S/O.VISWANATHAN .P.S,POOVELIL HOUSE,

¶12

PALIYAKARA.P.O, THIRUVALLA-689101.

¶13

4 ROHIT SURESH, AGED 23 YEARS S/O.SURESH.T,KUNNATHU VEEDU,PERINGARA.P.O, THIRUVALLA-689108.

¶14

5 BAGHESH, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.M.B.CHACKO,MULAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THEEPANI,THIRUVALLA-689101.

¶15

BY ADV. SHRI.M.V.S.NAMPOOTHIRY

¶16

RESPONDENTS:

¶17

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

¶18

2 JAYAKRISHNAN R. AGED 24 YEARS S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN,NANDAVANATHIL HOUSE, NEAR AMRITANANDHMAYI ASHRAM,THUKALASSERY, THIRUVALLA-689115.

¶19

Crmc 5086/2020

¶20

¶21

R2 BY ADV. SHINTO THOMAS

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crmc 5086/2020

V.G.ARUN, J.

=========================== Crl.M.C.No.5086 of 2020

¶27

=========================== Dated this the 21^st day of December, 2020

¶28

ORDER

¶29

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.2589 of 2020 registered at the Thiruvalla Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 308 r/w 149 of IPC. 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, stating that the dispute has been settled and that he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners.

¶30

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

¶31

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 dispute is settled and

¶32

Crmc 5086/2020

¶33

¶34

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.

¶35

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in Crime No.2589 of 2020 registered at the Thiruvalla Police Station is quashed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

lgk

Crmc 5086/2020

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 5086/2020

¶42

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶43

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.STATEMENT IN CRIME NO.2589/202O OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R.IN CRIME NO.2589/2020 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 21.10.2020.

Yahim Varghese v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yahim Varghese 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

Anilkumar R.M., Vs State of Kerala

Eappan M.Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Jinu Vs the State of Kerala

Salahudeen Vs State of Kerala

Janaki Sadanandan, Vs v.Sahadevan

Naushad v.U., Vs the State of Kerala