Allowed

1. Joy Joseph v. 1. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Sept 2022Crl.MC/2971/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous case, Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. allowed the petitioners to quash criminal proceedings under Section 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The court held that since the dispute was purely private and a settlement was reached, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on the Gian Singh principle, continuing the prosecution served no purpose.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed; the Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 529/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Muvattupuzha are quashed.

1. Joy Joseph Vs 1. State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 31ST BHADRA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 2971 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1-4:

¶7

1JOY JOSEPH
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O IYPE JOSEPH, MOOLAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE , CHETTEPEEDIKA,
MEENKUNNAM P.O , MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM -686672, PIN -
686672

¶8

2ELDHOSE JOY
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O JOY, MOOLAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE , CHETTEPEEDIKA, MEENKUNNAM
P.O , MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM -686672, PIN - 686672
3AGRA JOY
AGED 28 YEARS
D/O JOY, MOOLAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE , CHETTEPEEDIKA, MEENKUNNAM
P.O , MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM -686672, PIN - 686672
4KUNJIMOL JOY
AGED 50 YEARS
W/O JOY, MOOLAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE , CHETTEPEEDIKA, MEENKUNNAM
P.O , MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM -686672, PIN - 686672
BY ADVS.
THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
JAYARAMAN S.
ABISHEK JOHNY
NIRMAL CHERIYAN VARGHESE

¶9

RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031, PIN - 682031

¶11

2SAJI JOSEPH
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O IYPE JOSEPH, MOOLAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MEENKUNNAM P.O
MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM -686672, PIN - 686672
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
MELITUS MARIA STANLY(K/000845/2018)
ADV VIPIN NARAYAN -PP

¶12

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.09.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

Crl MC No. 2971/2022 2

¶14

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. , J.

¶15

=========================== Crl. MC No. 2971 of 2022

¶16

============================ Dated this the 22^nd day of September, 2022

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Crime No. 4073/2021 of Muvattupuzha Police Station which is now pending as CC No. 529/2022 in Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Muvattupuzha. The said case was registered for the offence punishable under section 324 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The prosecution case is that, on 03.12.2021, at 20:00 hours the petitioners assaulted the 2^nd respondent with a PVC pipe and therby caused injuries to him. Annexure A1 is the F.I.R and Annexure A2 is the final report submitted by the police. This Criminal MC is filed for quashing all sorts of proceedings pursuant to Annexure A3.

¶20

Heard Sri. Thomas J. Anakkallunkal, the learned council appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Vipin Narayanan, the learned public prosecutor appearing for the state and Sri. Arun Chandran, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

¶21

Crl MC No. 2971/2022 3

¶22

Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure A3 affidavit sworn by the de facto complainant is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 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.

¶23

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.

¶24

Crl MC No. 2971/2022 4

¶25

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-A2 final report submitted in Crime No. 4073/2021 of Muvattupuzha Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 529/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Muvattupuzha against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶26

Sd/ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

¶27

sks/-

¶28

Crl MC No. 2971/2022 5

¶29

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2971/2022

¶30

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.4073/2021 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM
Annexure A2FINAL REPORT IN CC NO. 529/2022 ON THE
FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT -I, MUVATTUPUZHA ARISING OUT OF
CRIME NO.4073/2021 OF MUVATTUPUZHA
POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
Annexure3AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT

1. Joy Joseph v. 1. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

1. Joy Joseph v. 1. 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

Mujeeb Rahman Vs Public Prosecutor

B.Mohan Kumar Vs 1. the State Police Chief, Police Head Quarters, Vazhuthacaud

Ramesh Vs State of Kerala

T.A. Kishore Vs State of Kerala

Arayakandi Salim Vs State of Kerala

Joseph M.George, Vs State of Kerala