Allowed

Majeed Parekkattil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Dec 2020Crl.MC/5299/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed Criminal Misc. No. 5299/2020, quashing the FIR for offenses under IPC and the SC/ST Act. The court noted the dispute was amicably settled, the respondent had no grievance, and continuance of proceedings would abuse the court process under Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Annexure A1 FIR and proceedings in Crime No. 451/2020 registered at Kooranchundu Police Station are quashed.

Majeed Parekkattil Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.5299 OF 2020(B)

¶6

CRIME NO.451/2020 OF Kooranchundu Police Station , Kozhikode

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS. 3 AND 4:

¶8

1 MAJEED PAREKKATTIL AGED 51 YEARS S/O. BABU, KOORACHUNDU POST, PAREKKATTU HOUSE, KOORACHUNDU, KOZHIKODE 673 527.

¶9

2 IJAZ MUHAMMED, AGED 22 YEARS S/O. MAJEED, KOORACHUNDU POST, PAREKKATTU HOUSE, KOORACHUNDU, KOZHIKODE 673 527.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.DHEERAJ KRISHNAN PEROT

¶11

RESPONDENT/STATE, CW1 AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶13

2 KUMARAN, AGED 59 YEARS S/O. GOPALAN, RESIDING AT KUMBLANGAL HOUSE, KOORACHUNDU P.O. OTTAPPALAM, KOORACHUNDU, KOZHIKODE 673 527.

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No.5299 OF 2020(B) ..2..

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Dated this the 4th day of December 2020 Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.451/2020

¶18

registered at the Koorachundu Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 145, 148, 448 and 324 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the 2^nd respondent. Annexure-A3 affidavit has been filed by 2^nd 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Crl.MC.No.5299 OF 2020(B) ..3..

¶21

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 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.

¶22

Crl.MC.No.5299 OF 2020(B) ..4..

¶23

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. AnnexureA1 FIR and the proceedings in Crime No.451/2020 registered at the Koorachundu Police Station is quashed.

¶24

SB/04/12/2020

¶25

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶26

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 5299/2020

¶27

Crl.MC.No.5299 OF 2020(B) ..5..

¶28

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶29

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 451 OF 2020 OF KOORACHUDU POLICE STATION, ON THE FILES OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS SPECIAL COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶30

ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REPROT SUBMITTED BY THE INVESTING OFFICE IN CRIME NO. 451 OF 2020 OF KOORACHNUD POLICE STATION, ON THE FILES OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS SPECIAL CO RUT, KOZHIKODE.

¶31

ANNEXURE A3 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES.

¶32

//true copy// P.A to Judge

Majeed Parekkattil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Majeed Parekkattil 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

Lissy Rajan Vs State of Kerala

Sareesh Vs State 0F Kerala

Shaila Beevi Vs Nassarudheen

Sali Abdulla Khadar Vs the State of Kerala

Sayyid Abdulla Habeeb Rahman Al Bukhari Vs State of Kerala

Aravind Vs State of Kerala