Allowed

Abhilash v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Mar 2021Crl.MC/277/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal court allowed a miscellaneous petition to quash criminal proceedings against petitioners accused of rioting and causing hurt. The court observed that the dispute leading to the crime was settled amicably by the injured parties, there was no public interest, and the possibility of conviction was remote, citing Supreme Court precedents on abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The Crl.M.C. is allowed and proceedings in C.C.No. 1375 of 2012 are quashed.

Abhilash 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

FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.277 OF 2021(D)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1375/2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

CRIME NO.90/2011 OF Aranmula Police Station , Pathanamthitta

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 ABHILASH AGED 28 YEARS S/O. SREEDHARAN PILLAI, ANU BHAVAN, NEAR MALAYALAPUZHA TEMPLE, ERAMMURI, MALAYALAPUZHA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶10

2 MANU AGED 28 YEARS S/O. SOMAN, KUNNATHUNKARATHUNDIYIL VEEDU, KUNNATHUNKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶11

3 VINEESH KUMAR AGED 28 YEARS

¶12

S/O. VIJAYAN PILLAI, KAVUMPURATHU VEEDU, THAZHAM, ARATTUKADAVU, WARD NO. 16, PATHANAMTHITTA MUNICIPALITY, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶13

4 UMESH AGED 29 YEARS

¶14

S/O. SASHIDHARAN NAIR, MOOLANKUZHI MELEPPURAM VEEDU, EDAPAVOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶15

5 ARUN KUMAR AGED 30 YEARS S/O. ANIL KUMAR, ARUN SADHANAM, EDAPARIYARAM MURI, ELANTHOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶16

6 ASWIN AGED 28 YEARS S/O. RADHAKRISHNAN, KANJIRAMNILKUNNATHIL HOUSE, ELAKOLLOOR MURI, PRAMADAM VILLAGE, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶17

BY ADV. SMT.ANNIE M.ABRAHAM

¶18

Crl.MC.No.277 OF 2021(D)

¶19

¶20

RESPONDENT/S:

¶21

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

¶22

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE (CRIME NO. 95/2011), ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶23

3 ANANDU V. AGED 28 YEARS S/O. VIJAY KUMAR, MOOTHAMMETHU HOUSE, MELUKARAP.O, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689541.

¶24

4 RAJEEV P. JOHN AGED 30 YEARS S/O. JOHN, PATHANPARAYIL, NARANGANAM P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689542.

¶25

5 JAHEER AKBAR AGED 29 YEARS S/O. ABBASS KUNJU, ANICHAMPARAMPIL, NARANGANAM

¶26

NORTH P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA, 689642.

¶27

6 NYJIL AGED 30 YEARS S/O. JOHN CHACKO, KONDOOR, NALKALIKAL, ARANMULA P.O, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶28

7 ASHISH J. MATHEW AGED 30 YEARS S/O. JOSEPH MATHEW, ORETHU, ELAKOLLOOR P.O, PRAMADOM, PATHANAMTHITTA, 689691,

¶29

8 TIJO MATHEW VARGHESE AGED 28 YEARS S/O. VARGHESE, EDAVANATHUKAVIL HOUSE, ANGADICAL, PUTHENKAVU P.O, CHENGANNUR, 689123.

¶30

9 ANSARY T.A. AGED 30 YEARS S/O. ABDULL AZEEZ, THEKKEMAVUMKAMANNIL, NARAGANAM NORTH P.O, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA, 689642.

¶31

10 MIDHUN MOHAN AGED 29 YEARS S/O. MOHANDAS, MELEDATHUPARAMBIL, ELANTHOOR P.O,

¶32

Crl.MC.No.277 OF 2021(D)

¶33

¶34

PATHANAMTHITTA - 689643.

¶35

11 SIBY THOMAS AGED 30 YEARS

¶36

S/O. THOMAS ABRAHAM, NEDUMKADAVIL, KNAJEETTUKARA P.O, AYOOR, - 689611.

¶37

12 SUDHEESH GEORGE JOSEPH AGED 29 YEARS

¶38

S/O. JOSEPH, EDATHIL THEKKETHIL, KOZHENCHERY P.O, 689641.

¶39

13 JITHIN

¶40

AGED 28 YEARS

¶41

VAZHEMALAYIL VEEDU, MALLAPUZHASSERY VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶42

R3-13 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.BIJU (MANJINIKARA)

¶43

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2021,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶44

Crl.MC.No.277 OF 2021(D)

¶45

¶46

O R D E R

¶47

Dated this the 5^th day of March, 2021

¶48

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 90 of 2011 registered at the Aranmula Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,148,323,324 r/w 149 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No. 1375 of 2012 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, and the other injured person, are arrayed as respondents 3 to 13. Annexures A3 to A13 are the affidavits filed by respondents 3 to 13, stating that the dispute, which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and they have no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶49

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

¶50

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the respondents 3 to 13, 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. The fact that the petitioners and the de facto complainants were students when the accident

¶51

Crl.MC.No.277 OF 2021(D)

¶52

¶53

occurred, is also taken into consideration . 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.

¶54

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No. 1375 of 2012 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate CourtI, Pathanamthitta is quashed.

¶55

Sd/V.G ARUN JUDGE

¶56

¶57

Crl.MC.No.277 OF 2021(D)

¶58

¶59

APPENDIX

¶60

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶61

ANNEXURE A1	A TRUE COPY OF ARANMULA DATED 14.02	OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.90/2011 POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITAA, .2011.
ANNEXURE A2	A TRUE COPY NO. 90/2011 PATHANAMTHI	OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME OF ARANMULA POLICE STATION, TTA, DATED 05.04.2011.
ANNEXURE A3	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.12.2020.
ANNEXURE A4	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A5	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A6	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A7	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A8	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A9	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A10	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A11	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A12	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.
ANNEXURE A13	A TRUE COPY RESPONDENT	OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD DATED 15.09.2020.

Abhilash v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhilash 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

Sankaranarayanan Vs State of Kerala

Sudeep, Vs State of Kerala

Muthoot Housing Finance Company Limited Vs Rameshkumar. B

Vishnu Vs State of Keral

Tijo Mathew Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Riyas, Vs State of Kerala