Allowed

Mohammed Shan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Nov 2021Crl.MC/4408/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to quash further proceedings against petitioners in a criminal case. The court quashed the proceedings upon finding that the issues had been amicably settled, involving no public interest, making continuation an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings in C.C. No.241/2017 arising out of Crime No.1164/2016 were quashed.

Mohammed Shan Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 19TH KARTHIKA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 4408 OF 2021

¶5

(TO QUASH FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1164/2016 OF VENJARAMMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PENDING BEFORE THE OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,NEDUMANGAD, AS CC NO. 241/2017)

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 AND 3:

¶7

1 MOHAMMED SHAN, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.NAVAS, MOOZHIYIL KUNNUMPURATHU HOUSE, THEMBAMOODU, PULLAMPARA P.O., NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM .

¶8

2 JIJIN R.S., AGED 28 YEARS S/O.RAJAPPAN, R.S.BHAVANAM, KIZHAKKEKONAM DESOM, PULLAMPARA P.O., NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADVS. D.KISHORE ARYA JOSEPH R.MURALEEKRISHNAN (MALAKKARA) MEERA GOPINATH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE, COMPLAINANT AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VENJARAMMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695 607.

¶13

3 SAJEENA, AGED 43 YEARS D/O.ABOOSA BEEVI, AMAL MANZIL, THEMBAMOODU, PULLAMPARA P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 607.

¶14

Cr.M.C.No.4408 of 2021

¶15

¶16

4 SHARAF, AGED 52 YEARS S/O.ABDUL KARIM, AMAL MANZIL, THEMBAMOODU, PULLAMPARA P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 607.

¶17

5 AMAL MOHAMMED, AGED 22 YEARS S/O.SHARAF, AMAL MANZIL, THEMBAMOODU, PULLAMPARA P.O., NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 607.

¶18

BY ADV V.A.VINOD

¶19

PP RENJIT GEORGE,SR GP

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

Cr.M.C.No.4408 of 2021

¶22

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Dated this the 10^th day of November, 2021

¶25

This Crl.M.C. has been filed seeking to quash the

¶26

further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.241/2017 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangadu, which arise out of Crime No.1164/2016 of Venjaramoodu Police Station, which has been registered for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 354, 324 and 326 of IPC. Petitioners are the accused Nos.2 and 3 in the above crime.

¶27

The 1^st accused in the above crime expired on 21.8.2020. Copy of death certificate has been produced from the side of the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶28

Annexure-I is the certified copy of the final report and Annexure-II is the copy of the affidavit duly sworn in by the 3^rd respondent/defacto complainant. Annexures-III & IV are the notary attested affidavits duly sworn in by the respondents Nos.4 and 5, who are the other injured witnesses.

¶29

Cr.M.C.No.4408 of 2021

¶30

¶31

At the time of argument, it is reported by the learned counsel for the petitioners that a counter case was pending and that case was already quashed as per the order in Crl.M.C. No.4413/2021 dated 07.10.2021.

¶32

It has come out from the affidavit duly sworn in by the defacto complainant and the other injured witnesses as well as from the statement of the defacto complainant that the entire issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and other injured persons have been amicably settled out of court. The defacto complainant and other injured witnesses don't want to prosecute the matter further against the petitioners. The 1^st accused expired even before the filing of this Crl.M.C. and copy of the death certificate produced from the either side to prove that he died on 21.8.2020.

¶33

Since, the entire issues between the parties have been amicably settled out of court and the issues are also purely private in nature and no public interest is involved. Continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners will

¶34

Cr.M.C.No.4408 of 2021

¶35

¶36

not serve any useful purpose and it will be an abuse of process of court. So, I find it just and proper to quash the entire further proceedings against the petitioners in the above crime.

¶37

In the result, Crl.M.C. allowed, and further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.241/2017 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangadu, which arise out of Crime No.1164/2016 of Venjaramoodu Police Station, is hereby quashed.

¶38

Hence, the Crl.M.C. allowed as above.

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA JUDGE

SMF

Cr.M.C.No.4408 of 2021

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4408/2021

¶45

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶46

ANNEXURE I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1164/2016 OF VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PENDING AS C.C 241/2017 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, NEDUMANGADU.

¶47

ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 16/9/2021 EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE NOTARY PUBLIC. ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 16/9/2021 EXECUTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE NOTARY PUBLIC.

¶48

ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 16/9/2021 EXECUTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE NOTARY PUBLIC.

¶49

//TRUE COPY//

¶50

PA TO JUDGE

Mohammed Shan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Shan 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

Rekha Najeesh @ Rekha, Vs State of Kerala

Neethu Treesa Jacob @ Neethu Vs Tom Puthenkalam Xavier

Arun Vs the State of Kerala

Shyam C. Vs State of Kerala

Jino Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Sharan, Vs State of Kerala