Allowed

Muhammed Nihal Sha v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Dec 2022Crl.MC/1460/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous case filed to quash proceedings for ragging under the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, the High Court of Kerala allowed the petition after finding the dispute private and settled. Relying on Gian Singh, the court quashed the FIR and further proceedings as no fruitful purpose would be served.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Misc. Case is allowed; the FIR in Crime No.44 of 2022 and all further proceedings against the petitioners are quashed.

Muhammed Nihal Sha Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

Crl.M.C.No.1460/22

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶7

CRL.MC NO. 1460 OF 2022

¶8

CRIME NO.44/2022 OF Vazhakkad Police Station, Malappuram

¶9

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶10

1 MUHAMMED NIHAL SHA, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMED KUTTY, MOOCHICHALIL HOUSE, POTHUVETTIPPARA,MUTHUVALLUR POST, MUNDAKKAL, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 673 638.

¶11

2 SAFWAN C.T, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.BASHEER C., THADATHIL HOUSE, CHERUVATTUR, VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM – 673 640.

¶12

3 MUHAMMAD SALMANUL ASHIQE P., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.SHOUKATH P., BUSHRA MANZIL, MUSLIYARANGADI, NEDIYIRPPU, MALAPPURAM – 673 638.

¶13

4 MUHAMMAD FAZIL, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL JALEEL E, EDAPPATTA HOUSE, POTHUKAL, CHUNKATHARA, MALAPPURAM – 679 334.

¶14

5 ABDURAHMAN SANAD K.P, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.HASSAINAN K.P, KAATTUPEEDIYEKKAL HOUSE, OLAVATTUR POST, KONDOTY, MALAPPURAM -673 638.

¶15

Crl.M.C.No.1460/22

¶16

¶17

6 MOHAMMAD ARSHAD K.P, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.KHALID K.P, THALIYADATH PARAMB HOUSE, WEST KANNANCHERI, ARTS COLLEGE POST, KOZHIKODE – 673 018.

¶18

BY ADV P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ

¶19

RESPONDENTS/STATE-COMPLAINANT & VICTIM:

¶20

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. 2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAZHAKKAD POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -673 638. 3 SAHAL SADAQ, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.SUBAIR CHATHUVAN, SADAQ MANZIL, OLIPRAM-14, THENIPPALAM POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT- 673 636. 4 PROF. E.P. IMBICHIKOYA, S/O.AHAMED KUTY HAJI AP, PALAYIL HOUSE, FEROKE P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PRINCIPAL, SAFI INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED STUDY, VAZHAYOOR EAST, VAZHAYOOR, MALAPPURAM ( IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 08.12.2022 IN CRL.M.A.NO.3/2022) BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ABDUL KAREEM N. AHAMED FAZIL

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶22

08.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.1460/22

O R D E R

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.44 of 2022 of Vazhakkad Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998.

¶27

Annexure-A1 is the FIR. The 3^rd respondent is the victim and the 4^th respondent is the de facto complainant, who is the Principal of the College named Safi Institute of Advanced Study, Vazhoor. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 FIR.

¶28

Heard Sri.P.C.Muhammed Noushiq, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Sangeetharaj N.K., learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.E.C.Ahamed Fazil, for the 3^rd and 4^th respondents.

¶29

Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. AnnexureA2 affidavit sworn by the 3^rd respondent who is the victim is filed and another affidavit sworn to by the 4^th respondent/de facto complainant is alos filed along with Crl.M.A.No.3 of 2022 in this Crl.M.C., to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavits, the 3^rd respondent victim and the 4^th respondent/de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed their no-objection to quash the

¶30

Crl.M.C.No.1460/22 4

¶31

proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd and 4^th respondent/de facto complainant also confirms the same. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine.

¶32

The allegations would reveal that the dispute is purely private in nature. In such circumstances, by applying the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303] , proceedings can be quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to continue.

¶33

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-A1 FIR submitted in Crime No.44 of 2022 of Vazhakkad Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

DG/9.12.22

Crl.M.C.No.1460/22

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1460/2022

¶40

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶41

Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 44 OF 2022 OF VAZHAKKAD POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT Annexure A2 AN AFFIDAVIT DATE 24.02.2022

Muhammed Nihal Sha v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muhammed Nihal Sha 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

Raji , W/O.Vikraman Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Nithin @ Nithen Clement, Vs State of Kerala

Beena R Vs State of Kerala

Aboobacker Koothradan Vs Sandeep

Manoj Kumar K.V. Vs Station House Officer

Jaleel Kalathil Vs State of Kerala