Allowed

Anoj Thomas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Jun 2022Crl.MC/2168/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by five accused persons seeking quashing of criminal proceedings under Sections 341, 324, 506(1) and 34 IPC. The court quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings citing a valid settlement between the parties and applying Section 482 Cr.P.C. along with principles from Gian Singh v. State of Punjab.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the FIR in Crime No.1271 of 2018 and all further proceedings in C.C.No.721 of 2019.

Anoj Thomas Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.M.C.No.2168/22

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 28^TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 2168 OF 2022

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 721/2019 OF JUDICIAL

¶8

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,PATHANAMTHITTA

¶9

CC 721/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -

¶10

I,PATHANAMTHITTA

¶11

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶12

1 ANOJ THOMAS, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS GEORGE, MUTHAVANKOTTU HOUSE, MOOLAMATTOM P.O., ARAKKULAM, IDUKKI, KERALA, PIN – 685 589.

¶13

2 VISHNU RAJ, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.RAJBEER, PANDINJARE PANAYAPPALLIL, KIZHAKKUMURRY, KAVUMBHAGOM P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN – 695 102.

¶14

3 ASLAM P ISMAIL, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.ISMAIL P.M., PUTHENVEETTIL PARAYIL, EDAKUNNAM, PARATHODE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA PIN - 686512

¶15

4 NEJOMON T.A, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.ASHA THANKACHAN, ALAKKOTTU KIZHAKKETHIL MEZHUVELI, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN – 689 507.

¶16

5 JITTO K JOSE, AGED 25 YEARS,

¶17

S/O.JOSE ABRAHAM, KARIMPIL HOUSE, MUNDUKOTTACKAL P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DIST, KERALA, PIN – 689 649.

BY ADVS.

M.R.JAYAPRASAD

Crl.M.C.No.2168/22

ROOPKUMAR G.

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶24

1 STATE OF KERALA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 011.

¶25

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN – 689 533.

¶26

3 MOHAMMED ASIF, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.P.H. ANSARI, PARAKKU MUKALIL VEEDU, CHERUKOLE P.O., KATTOOR PETTA, CHERUKOLE VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRI, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN – 689 650.

¶27

4 JIDEEV RAJU, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.RAJU VARGHESE, VALUPARAMBIL, THEKKEMALA P.O., KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN - 689654

¶28

5 VISHNU V PURUSHOTHAMAN, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYAMMA, VIPIN BHAVAN, VADAKKUPURAM P.O., MALAYALAPUZHA, KIZHAKKUPURAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN – 689 653.

¶29

6 SONU R., S/O.BIJU, PURAYIDATHIL, KOZHENCHERRY P.O., KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, PIN – 689 641.

¶30

BY ADVS. ARUL MURALIDHARAN ASHWIN ANTONY(K/000166/2017)

¶31

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.2168/22

O R D E R

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1271 of 2018 Aranmula Police Station, which is now pending as C.C.No.721 of 2019 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 324, 506(1) read with 34 IPC.

¶36

The allegation against the petitioners is that, on 13.09.2018 the petitioners assaulted the respondents 3 to 6 because of political rivalry. Annexure-A1 is the FIR and Annexure-A2 is the final report. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶37

Heard Sri.M.R.Jayaprasad, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Sudheer Gopalakrishnan, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.Arul Muraleedharan, learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 6.

¶38

Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexures-A3 to A6 affidavits sworn by the respondents 3 to 6 are filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the respondents 3 to 6 had explicitly acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel

¶39

Crl.M.C.No.2168/22

¶40

¶41

appearing for the respondents 3 to 6 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 mainly 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.1271 of 2018 of Aranmula Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.721 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pathanamthitta, against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

DG/29.6.22

Crl.M.C.No.2168/22

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2168/2022

¶50

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶51

AnnexureA1 FIR IN CRIME NO. 1271/ 2018

¶52

AnnexureA2 FINAL REPORT IN CC NO. 721/2019

¶53

Annexure A4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE CW2 4TH RESPONDENT Annexure A5 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE CW3, 5TH RESPONDENT Annexure A6 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE CW4, 6TH RESPONDENT

¶54

Crl.M.C.No.2168/22 6

Anoj Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoj Thomas 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

Aromal S Vs State of Kerala

Arun Vs State of Kerala

Vinaya Kumar Vs the State of Kerala

Ajin Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Asif Vs State of Kerala

Deepu Vs State of Kerala