Allowed

M.P.Shine Lal (A1) v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Oct 2022Crl.MC/2139/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash proceedings under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), and 427 of the IPC alleging obstruction of public meeting. The court exercised inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC as the dispute was private and settled.

What did the court decide?

The FIR under Crime No.680 of 2013 of Poojappura Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.3451 of 2013 against the petitioners are quashed.

M.P.Shine Lal (A1) Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.M.C.No.2139/2019

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 27TH ASWINA, 1944

¶7

CRL.MC NO. 2139 OF 2019

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCC 3451/2013 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF

¶9

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,TRIVANDRUM

¶10

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 8:

¶11

1 M.P.SHINE LAL (A1), AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.S. MANOHARAN, SHINE NIVAS, PULIYOORKONAM, KATTAKODE P.O, KATTAKADA, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. NOW RESIDING AT TC 48/486, S.S. BHAVAN, TAGORE ROAD, ARAMADA P.O, THRIKKANAPURAM, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

2 VINOD (A2), AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.BABU, TC 18/3225, PANAYARAVILA VEEDU, AALAPPURAM, THRIKANNAPURAM, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶13

3 VINOD (A3), AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.KAVIRAJAN,TC 18/471, CHITHIRA, TARA-B-30, AALAPPURAM, THRIKKANNAPURAM, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

4 JOSE (A4), AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.APPU, AALAPPURAM PUTHEN VEEDU, PUNNAYKKAMUGAL, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶15

Crl.M.C.No.2139/2019

¶16

¶17

5 SYAMDAS (A5), AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.DEVADAS, MINI BHAVAN, AALAPPURAM, PUNNAYKKAMUGAL, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶18

6 JAYAPRASAD @ GIRI (A6), AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.SAAMBASIVAN, MINI BHAVAN, AALAPPURAM, PUNNAYKKAMUGAL, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶19

7 VIJESH (A7), AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRAN, TC 8/367, CHITHIRA, ART-B-81, AALAPPURAM, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶20

8 KIRAN (A8), AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.AJIKUMAR, TC 8/553, THARATTAYIL VEEDU, ODANKUZHI, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶21

BY ADVS. BINU GEORGE SMT.P.M.PRINCY LAL

¶22

RESPONDENTS/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶23

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

¶24

2 SREEJITH,

¶25

AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. SREEKUMARAN NAIR, TC 18/561, PUSHPA NIVAS, PUNNAYKAMUGAL , THIRUMALA VILLAGE,

¶26

Crl.M.C.No.2139/2019

¶27

¶28

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 032.

¶29

BY ADV R.RANJITH (MANJERI)

¶30

SMT.SREEJA. V – SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶31

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.2139/2019

O R D E R

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.680 of 2013 of Poojappura Police Station, which now pending as C.C.No.3451 of 2013 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvanathapuram. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b) and 427 of IPC.

¶36

The prosecution case is that, on 17.06.2013 at 15:00 hours, the accused caused obstruction to the preparations for a public meeting convened by the de facto complainant by causing damages to the articles kept for the meeting. Annexuure-A1 is the FIR and Annexure-A2 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶37

Heard Sri.Binu George, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Sreeja V., learned Senior Government Pleader and Sri.R.Renjith (Manjeri), learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

¶38

Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. AnnexureA3 affidavit sworn by the 2^nd respondent/de facto complainant is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 2^nd respondent/de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-

¶39

Crl.M.C.No.2139/2019

¶40

¶41

objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd 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.

¶42

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.

¶43

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-A1 FIR submitted in Crime No.680 of 2013 of Poojappura Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.3451 of 2013 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

DG/20.10.22

Crl.M.C.No.2139/2019

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2139/2019

¶50

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶51

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 680/2013 POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 680/2013 POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT DATED 10.11.2018 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

M.P.Shine Lal (A1) v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.P.Shine Lal (A1) 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

Manoj Kumar Agarwal Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan @ Murukeshan Vs the State of Kerala

Anilkumar @ Thampi Vs State of Kerala

Anoop K. J. Vs State of Kerala

Madukolu Chibuzor Samson Vs State of Kerala

Mujeeb Rehman Vs Station House Officer