Allowed

Rmp Info Tec Pvt. Ltd. Company, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Mar 2021Crl.MC/262/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous application filed by accused persons in a cheating case. Relying on affidavits from victims showing an amicable settlement and finding that the dispute was settled, the Court held that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and quashed the criminal case.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous case was allowed and the proceedings in C.C. No. 83 of 2019 were quashed.

Rmp Info Tec Pvt. Ltd. Company, Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 83/2019 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE , KALEPETTA

¶7

CRIME NO.162/2011 OF Vythiri Police Station , Wayanad

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 RMP INFO TEC PVT. LTD. COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, DAVAL CHANDAN, APPOLO, DUBAI PLAZA BUILDING, MAHALINGAPURAM ROAD, CHENNAI-34.

¶10

2 DAVAL CHANDAN AGED 54 YEARS S/O. JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H. NO.25, (OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶11

3 PRAVEEN KUMAR CHANDAN AGED 45 YEARS S/O. JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H. NO.25, (OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶12

4 DILEEP KUMAR CHANDAN AGED 43 YEARS

¶13

S/O. JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H. NO.25, (OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶14

5 RAJESH KUMAR CHANDAN AGED 40 YEARS

¶15

S/O. JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H. NO.25, (OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶16

6 DAYALAN AGED 41 YEARS S/O. THUKKURAMAN, PLOT NO.57-1/KGR NAGAR, KATTUPAKKAM P.O., THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, CHENNAI-56.

¶17

7 M. SHAMSUDHEEN AGED 61 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED ABDUL KHADER, ARAFA HOUSE, NLRA-51A, NEERALI LANE, ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶18

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶19

¶20

8	SAJI PARAKKAL @ SAJI P.A.
	S/O. P.M. ANTONY, PARAKKAL HOUSE, PATTIKKAD P.O., THRISSUR, V. SREENIVASAN, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. NANU NAIR, VALLALUR HOUSE, MULAYAM, AYYAPPANKAVU P.O., THRISSUR.
9	V. SREENIVASAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O.NANU NAIR, VALLALUR HOUSE, MULAYAM, AYYAPPANKAVU P.O., THRISSUR.
10	V.R. SREENIVASAN AGED 55 YEARS S/O. V.K. RAMADEVAN, PALAPARAMBIL, NALAMKALLU, ARIMBUR P.O., THRISSUR.
11	JAMES MATHEW AGED 48 YEARS S/O. MATHEW, SNEHASANDRAM, KANNORA P.O., PEECHI, THRISSUR.
12	ABHILASH THOMAS AGED 40 YEARS S/O. THOMAS, KANAKKANAD HOUSE, MULAMKAVU P.O., SULTHANBATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.
13	NABEEL MOHAMMED AGED 43 YEARS S/O. P.A. MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, ORCHID MEDOWS, D15, KUSUMAGIRI P.O., KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM.
14	MUBEEL MOHAMMED AGED 39 YEARS S/O. P.A. MOHAMMED IBRAHIM, ORCHID MEDOWS, D15, KUSUMAGIRI P.O., KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM.
15	C.V. SUNIL KUMAR AGED 59 YEARS S/O. VELAYUDHAN, CHERAYATH HOUSE, CHETTUPUZHA P.O., THRISSUR.
16	K.B. SUNILBABU AGED 54 YEARS S/O. BHASKARAN, KUNNEL HOUSE, KUMBALANGI SOUTH P.O., ERNAKULAM.
17	ANTHONICHAN
	AGED 60 YEARS

¶21

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶22

¶23

S/O. K.J. VARGHESE, KANNAMPUZHA VEEDU, AVALAKUNDU P.O., POONTHOPPU, ALAPPUZHA.

¶24

18 BENNY E. AGED 47 YEARS S/O. ESTHAQ, ASHLY VILLA, KAPPAKKAD, PUNNAPRA P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶25

19 BIJU MAMMAN AGED 47 YEARS

¶26

S/O. P.M. MAMMEN, PAKKALIL HOUSE, RAMANKARI P.O., VEZAPPRA, ALAPPUZHA.

¶27

20 SAJEEV V.P. AGED 49 YEARS S/O. VENUGOPAL, VENIEETH HOUSE, PINAMKODE ROAD, KALPETTA, WAYANAD.

¶28

21 SHAMSUDHEEN AGED 42 YEARS

¶29

S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, KAMBURATH HOUSE, IDIYAMVAYAL, 6TH ILE, ACHOOR, WAYANAD.

¶30

22 T.P. GOPALAN AGED 48 YEARS S/O. THOLAN, PAKKALLIL HOUSE, RAMANGIRI P.O., VEZHAPRA, ALAPPUZHA.

¶31

BY ADVS. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR SRI.S.K.ADHITHYAN SRI.SABU PULLAN SRI.GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN

¶32

RESPONDENT/S:

¶33

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

¶34

2 THE DETECTIVE INSPECTOR, CBCID, EOW-III, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶35

3 ASHRAF, AGED 45 YEARS S/O. SAIDALAVI, PALLATHIL HOUSE, ANAPPARA ESTATE, CHUNDEL, WAYANAD-673123.

¶36

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶37

¶38

4 BEERANKUTTY AGED 45 YEARS

¶39

S/O. MOIDU, POONKUNNATHU HOUSE, ANAPPARA ESTATE, CHUNDEL, WAYANAD-673123.

¶40

5 MAIMUNA AGED 49 YEARS W/O. MOHAMMED, MADEENATH VEEDU, ANAPPARA ESTATE, CHUNDEL, WAYANAD-673123.

¶41

6 CHANDRASEKHARAN AGED 50 YEARS

¶42

S/O. GOPALAN NAIR, NAGERI HOUSE, KARASSERI P.O., MUKKOM, KOZHIKODE-673602.

¶43

7 IBRAHIM

¶44

AGED 55 YEARS

¶45

S/O. KONTHALAM, NAINAMKUNNEL HOUSE, VAYATHAYI

¶46

PARALLI, MUKKOM NORTH, KOZHIKODE-673602.

¶47

8 SHAJI

¶48

AGED 54 YEARS

¶49

S/O. SATHYAN, VATTACHIRAYIL HOUSE, KOODARANHI, KAKKADAMPOYIL PO., KOZHIKODE-673603.

¶50

9 ABID

¶51

AGED 28 YEARS S/O. LATHEEF, KALATHIL HOUSE, CHOODAL, WAYANAD673123.

¶52

R1-2 BY ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION R3-9 BY ADV. K.K.RAJEEV

¶53

OTHER PRESENT:

¶54

SR.GP.C.K.SURESH FOR ADGP

¶55

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶56

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶57

¶58

O R D E R

¶59

Dated this the 16^th day of March, 2021

¶60

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 162 of 2011 registered at the Vythiri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420, 120(b) r/w 34 of IPC, now pending as C.C No. 83 of 2019 on the files of the Chief Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kalpetta. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered and the other injured person are arrayed as respondents 3 to 9. Annexures AII to AVIII are the affidavits been filed by respondents 3 to 9 respectively, stating that the dispute, which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and they have no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶61

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

¶62

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the respondents 3 to 9, 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,

¶63

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶64

¶65

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.

¶66

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No. 83 of 2019 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kalpetta, is quashed.

¶67

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶68

¶69

Crl.MC.No.262 OF 2021(C)

¶70

¶71

APPENDIX

¶72

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶73

ANNEXURE	I CERTIFIED COPY O THE 2ND RESPONDE THE CHIEF JUDICI KALPETTA AS FINA	F NT AL L	THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY DATED 29/09/2018 BEFORE MAGISTRATE'S COURT, REPORT NO.38/2019.
ANNEXURE	II AFFIDAVIT SWORN 11/04/2017.	BY	THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	III AFFIDAVIT SWORN 11/04/2017.	BY	THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	IV AFFIDAVIT SWORN 11/04/2017.	BY	THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	V AFFIDAVIT SWORN 09/11/2020.	BY	THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	VI AFFIDAVIT SWORN 09/11/2020.	BY	THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	VII AFFIDAVIT SWORN 12/11/2020.	BY	THE 8TH RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	VIII AFFIDAVIT SWORN 13/11/2020.	BY	THE 9TH RESPONDENT DATED
ANNEXURE	IX TRUE COPY OF THE NO.7846/2019 DAT	O ED	RDER IN CRL. MC 07/02/2020.
ANNEXURE	X TRUE COPY OF THE CRL. MC NO.266/2	O 02	RDER DATED 18/09/2020 IN 0.
ANNEXURE	XI AFFIDAVIT SWORN BEFORE THE NOTAR	BY Y	THE 3RD RESPONDENT PUBLIC DATED 12.02.2021
ANNEXURE	XII AFFIDAVIT SWORN BEFORE THE NOTAR	BY Y	THE 4TH RESPONDENT PUBLIC DATED 3.02.2021
ANNEXURE	XIII AFFIDAVIT SWORN	BY	THE 5TH RESPONDENT
	BEFORE THE NOTAR	Y	PUBLIC DATED 3.02.2021

Rmp Info Tec Pvt. Ltd. Company, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rmp Info Tec Pvt. Ltd. Company, 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

Asif Aslam Vs State of Kerala

Siddique C.A. @ Aboobacker Siddique Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Vs State of Kerala

Shivakumar, Vs State of Kerala

Sanesh Vs State of Kerala

Rahul Raj @ Unni Vs State of Kerala