Allowed

Sajeesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Mar 2021Crl.MC/289/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court allowed the petition and quashed the trial based on amicable settlement affidavits from injured parties, noting the dispute was resolved and no public interest remained, citing Supreme Court precedents on quashing criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous case was allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.759/2017 were quashed.

Sajeesh Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶7

Crl.MC.No.289 OF 2021(E)

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 759/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD

¶9

CRIME NO.250/2017 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

¶10

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 6:

¶11

1 SAJEESH AGED 33 YEARS S/O.VIJAYALAKSHMANAN,THALAPOTTA HOUSE,KALLAMPARAMBU,KINAVALLOOR, PARALI.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶12

2 VINESH, AGED 30 YEARS S/O.VIJAYALAKSHMANAN,THALAPOTTA HOUSE,KALLAMPARAMBU,KINAVALLOOR, PARALI.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶13

3 SAJEESH @ KANNAN, AGED 34 YEARS S/O.SWAMINATHAN,SAKTHI NIVAS,MANDEKKADU,KINAVALLOOR, PARALI.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶14

4 SHIJU, AGED 36 YEARS S/O.KESAVAN,MANDEKKADU HOUSE, KINAVALLOOR,PARALI.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶15

5 SREEYESH, AGED 27 YEARS S/O.SREENIVASAN,SANTHI NIVAS,VILLWOM KADU,KINAVALLOOR.P.O, PARALI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶16

6 SANESH, AGED 31 YEARS S/O.VASUDEVAN,KUNNIL HOUSE,KINAVALLOOR, PARALI.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶17

CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

BY ADV. SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR

¶20

RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT&OTHER INJURED:

¶21

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

¶22

2 DARVIN T.DAVID, AGED 30 YEARS S/O.T.A.DAVID,THADAATHIL PARAMBU VEEDU, KINAVALLOOR.P.O, PARALI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678612.

¶23

3 PRASANTH.K.P, AGED 29 YEARS S/.O.PRABHAKARAN,KIZHAKKUMPURAM VILLAGE, KINAVALLOOR(PO),PARALI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678612.

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021

¶26

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

Dated this the 17^th day of March 2021

¶29

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 6 in Crime No.250/2017 registered at the Mankara Police Station, Palakkad for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 341 & 326 read with Section 149 of IPC, now pending as C.C. No.759/2017 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered and the other injured persons have filed Annexure-B affidavits, stating that the dispute, which was the reason for the incident and registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably and they have 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 affidavits filed by the 2^nd & 3^rd respondents and the

¶32

CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021

¶33

¶34

other injured person, 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.

¶35

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.759/2017 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad is quashed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

NB/17.03.2021

CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX

¶43

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶44

ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.251/2017 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION,PALAKKAD

¶45

ANNEXURE B THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE RESPONDENT N0.2 AND 3.

¶46

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶47

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

Sajeesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajeesh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Shivakumar, Vs State of Kerala

Sanesh Vs State of Kerala

Anu Sahad Vs State of Kerala

Kabeer Alias Jabir Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Kunhi K.P. Vs State of Kerala