Allowed

Riyas, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Mar 2021Crl.MC/338/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner for offences under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, and 308, holding that the dispute was amicably settled, no public interest was involved, and continuance of proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Misc. Case and all proceedings in Crime No. 2882 of 2020 of Kallambalam Police Station are quashed.

Riyas, 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.338 OF 2021(B)

¶6

CRIME NO.2882/2020 OF Kallambalam Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

RIYAS, AGED 32 YEARS S/O KAREEM, RESIDING AT NIHAS MANZIL, AALUMKUNNU, NAVAIKULAM, KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 03.

¶9

BY ADV. SHRI.M.DINESH

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.

¶12

2 VISHNU, AGED 32 YEARS S/O MOHANAN NAIR, RESIDING AT VISHNU BHAVAN, NEAR PATTALAMMUKKU MARKET, NAVAIKULAM (PO), NAVAIKULAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 603.

¶13

R2 BY ADV. M.R.SARIN

¶14

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

¶15

Crl.MC.No.338 OF 2021(B)

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Dated this the 5^th day of March, 2021

¶19

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.2882 of 2020 registered at the Kallambalam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b) 324 and 308 of IPC. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered is arrayed as the 2^nd respondent. Annexure A2 affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondent stating that the dispute, which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and he has no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶20

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

¶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 that, no public interest is involved in the 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

¶22

Crl.MC.No.338 OF 2021(B)

¶23

¶24

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.

¶25

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure A1 FIR and all proceedings in Crime No. 2882 of 2020 of Kallambalam Police Station

is quashed.

Sd/V.G ARUN JUDGE

Crl.MC.No.338 OF 2021(B)

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT OF IN CRIME NO 2882/2010 OF KALLAMBALAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶34

ANNEXURE A2 NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 1.1.2021

Riyas, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyas, 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

Abhilash Vs State of Kerala

Tijo Mathew Varghese Vs State of Kerala