Allowed

Khalid, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Nov 2021Crl.MC/3547/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single accused Criminal Misc. Case filed to quash further proceedings in a criminal case involving assault and other offences. The High Court considered the petitioner's established mental illness and the settlement between parties, holding that continuation of proceedings was not warranted.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in Crime No.868/2020 of Koduvally Police Station against the petitioner are quashed.

Khalid, Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3547 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

KHALID, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.ABDUL KAREEM, ELETTIL P.O., THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 572.

¶8

BY ADVS. K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH VANDANA MENON P.SHAMSUDDEEN

¶9

RESPONDENTS/ STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA,

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, (CRIME NO.868/2020 OF KODUVALLY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT), PIN-682 031.

¶12

2 USMAN.P.K., AGED 52 YEARS S/O.AYAMMED KUTTY, POOVATHUMKANDIYIL HOUSE, ELETTIL P.O., KODUVALLY-673 572.

¶13

BY ADV VIMAL VIJAY

¶14

PP SANGEETHARAJ N.R

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶16

01.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

-2-

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 3547 OF 2021

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime

¶21

868/2020 of Koduvally police station. This Crl.M.C

¶22

has been filed seeking to quash the entire further proceedings in Crime 868/2020 of Koduvally police station, for the offence punishable under Sections 448, 341, 323, 324, 506 and 308 IPC.

¶23

Allegation against the petitioner is that on 29.09.2020 at about 9.30.a.m., the petitioner went

¶24

to the house of the 2^nd respondent armed with a chopper, iron rod and an air gun and threatened the 2^nd respondent, his wife and children and grandson.

¶25

When they tried to run away, the accused fired with

¶26

the air gun and thereby caused injury to the left thigh bone of the 2^nd respondent.

¶27

According to the petitioner, he was

¶28

suffering from mental depression and was under

¶29

-3-

¶30

CRL.MC NO. 3547 OF 2021

¶31

medical treatment. He was admitted in the V.R.C

¶32

Hospital and Rehabilitation Centre from 30.09.2020 to 07.11.2020.

¶33

Annexure-B is the copy of the certificate

¶34

proving that fact. Annexure-A is the copy of the FIR. Annexure-C is the true copy of the medical bills issued from V.R.C Hospital in the name of the petitioner. Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner as per order in Annexure-B.

¶35

Notice was issued to the 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant and Adv.Sri.Vimal Vijay appeared on behalf of the defacto complainant and a counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the defacto complainant. In the counter affidavit defacto complainant, also stated about the mental illness of the petitioner and further that the act of the petitioner against the defacto complainant was unintentional and the matter has been amicably settled in the presence of mediators and hence the defacto complainant has no objection in quashing

¶36

-4-

¶37

CRL.MC NO. 3547 OF 2021

¶38

the further proceedings in the FIR against the

¶39

petitioner.

¶40

The learned Public Prosecutor produced copy of the report of the SHO Koduvally Police Station along with the copy of statement of the defacto complainant. In the statement given to the police, it was reiterated that he was not intending

¶41

to prosecute the case further against the petitioner.

¶42

It has come out that the petitioner had

¶43

been suffering from mental illness during the relevant time. Annexure- B certificate produced from the side of the petitioner would show that he was having Polysubstance Dependence Syndrome + Psychosis Induced + PAPA and needs long term treatment for control of the symptoms. The defacto complainant is presently aware of the mental illness of the petitioner. So it appears that the

¶44

incident occurred out of the mental imbalance of

¶45

the petitioner. More over, the defacto complainant

¶46

-5-

¶47

CRL.MC NO. 3547 OF 2021

¶48

has no objection in quashing the further

¶49

proceedings against the petitioner since they have amicably settled the entire issues between them.

¶50

So in view of the above circumstances,

¶51

especially due to the fact that the petitioner had been undergoing treatment for mental illness during the relevant time and settlement arrived at between the parties, I am of the view that continuation of

¶52

the proceedings against the petitioner is not at all warranted in this case.

¶53

In the result, Crl.M.C allowed and all further

¶54

proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.868/2020 of Koduvally Police Station, is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA

JUDGE

hmh

-6-

CRL.MC NO. 3547 OF 2021

¶61

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3547/2021

¶62

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶63

Annexure A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR DATED 30.09.2020 IN CRIME NO.868/2020 OF KODUVALLY POLICE STATION.

¶64

Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY VRC HOSPITAL & REHABILITATION CENTRE DATED 19.11.2020.

¶65

Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL BILL ISSUED BY VRC HOSPITAL & REHABILITATION CENTRE DATED 08.07.20201.

¶66

Annexure D TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 12.10.2020 IN CRL.MC NO.1021/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF SESSION, KOZHIKODE DIVISION.

¶67

RESPONDENT ANNEXURE NIL

Khalid, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khalid, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A Vs State of Kerala

Binu Gopal @ Binu Vs State of Kerala

Binu Vs State of Kerala

Jishnu Vs State of Kerala

Asha Anoop Vs the State Police Chief

Sahad Vs the State of Kerala