Petitioners, accused in a criminal case involving hurt and affray, sought quashing of proceedings. The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings, finding the dispute settled, no public interest involved, and conviction unlikely due to youthful status of parties.
Cr.MC. allowed; proceedings in C.C.No. 1114 of 2018 quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.463 OF 2021(G)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 1114/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KODUNGALLUR
CRIME NO.560/2018 OF Valappad Police Station , Thrissur
PETITIONER/S:
1 RADHUL AGED 23 YEARS RAJESH, KURUVVGATTIL HOUSE, PALAZHI DESAM, KARAMUKKU VILLAGE, THRISSUR - 680 613.
2 ANJUAL AGED 22 YEARS S/O. RAMESH, VADUKKUMCHERY HOUSE, CHANTHAPADI, ENGANDIYUR, THRISSUR - 680 567.
3 ADARSH AGED 21 YEARS S/O. SASIDHARAN, KAZHUNGIL HOUSE, NALAM KALLU, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR - 679 562.
4 LENIN AGED 24 YEARS
S/O. SANTHOSH, ERANEZHATH HOUSE, MUTTICHUR DESAM, VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, THRISSUR - 680 570.
5 SABITH AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SUBAIR, KARUPPAM VEETTIL, AYINIKKAKPALLI, ERIYAD, EDAVILAGU P. O., KODUNGALOOR, THRISSUR - 680 671.
6 UNNIRAJ
AGED 24 YEARS S/O. ULLAS, PALLITHARA HOUSE, KARAYAMUTTOM P. O., VALAPPAD, THRISSUR - 680 567.
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O. PRASANNAN, IRADA HOUSE, CHEMAPPILLI DESOM,
Crl.MC.No.463 OF 2021(G)
2
THANNIYAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR - 680 564.
BY ADV. SRI.V.A.VINOD
RESPONDENT/S:
3 ANURAG AGED 23 YEARS
S/O. SURENDRAN, PONNARASSERY HOUSE, KP NAIR ROAD, VALAPPAD, THRISSUR - 680 567.
4 MUHAMMED SHERIN AGED 23 YEARS S/O. SHARAFUDEEN, NALAKATHU VELLURIYIL HOUSE, CHETTUVA, ENGANDIYOOR, THRISSUR - 680 567.
5 ABIN THEJUS
AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ARUMUGHAN, CHAZHUVEETTIL, CHANDAPADY, VALAPPAD, THRISSUR - 680 567.
R3-5 BY ADV. SHAKTHI PRAKASH
OTHER PRESENT:
PP T.R.RENJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.463 OF 2021(G)
3
ORDER
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2021
Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.560 of 2018 registered at the Valappad Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 149 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.1114 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, and the other injured persons are arrayed as respondents 3, 4 and 5. Annexures AIII, AIV and AV are the affidavits filed by respondents 3, 4 and 5 respectively, stating that the dispute which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and they have no subsisting grievance in the matter.
Crl.MC.No.463 OF 2021(G)
4
and the de facto complainants were students when the accident 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.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No. 1114 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate CourtKodungallur , is quashed.
Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE
SJ
Crl.MC.No.463 OF 2021(G)
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE I COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.560/2018 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. ANNEXURE II COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO.1114/2018. ANNEXURE III AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 18.01.2021. ANNEXURE IV AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.01.2021. ANNEXURE V AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.01.2021.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings should be quashed on grounds of settlement and remote possibility of conviction.
Whether the matter involves public interest or abuse of process of court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of PunjabApplied¶42
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] · Who else cites this
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and anotherApplied¶42
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303] · Who else cites this
Radhul
Anjual
Adarsh
Lenin
Sabith
Unniraj
V.G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
