Allowed

Saju P Mathew v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Sept 2022Crl.MC/4073/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous case arising from a dispute settled between parties, the High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner under Section 482 CrPC, finding the dispute private in nature and prosecution prospects bleak due to settlement.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. No. 4073/2022 allowed; Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. 240/2021 against the petitioner quashed.

Saju P Mathew Vs 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 23RD BHADRA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 4073 OF 2022

¶6

CC 240/2021 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PIRAVOM
CRIME NO.1467/2019 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

SAJU P MATHEW
AGED 45 YEARS, S/O K.V.MATHAI
PARAPPALIL HOUSE,NAMAKUZHI, MOOLAKULAM NORTH,
PIRAVAM, PIN – 686664

¶9

BY ADV K.R.SAJITH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶12

REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031

¶13

2STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PIRAVAM POLICE STATION, PIRAVAM, PIN – 686664

¶14

3AKASH LAL
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O RAMESHAN
ADIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU , PIRAVAM VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM, PIN – 686664

¶15

4AJESH SHANKER
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O SHANKER, KAIPILLIL VEETTIL, PIRAVAM VILLAGE,
PIRAVAM, PIN – 686664

¶16

BY ADV

¶17

ADV K.BIJU

¶18

ADV.C.S.HRITHWIK – SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶20

14.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

¶22

CRL.MC NO. 4073 OF 2022

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1467/2019 of

¶25

Piravom Police Station which is now pending as C.C. No.240/2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Piravom. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 323, 294(b, 506(1) and 341 of Indian Penal Code.

¶26

The prosecution case is that on 19.10.2019 at 9.30 p.m. the petitioner abused the 3^rd and 4^th respondents and attacked them with a helmet thereby committed the offences. Annexure 1 is the First Information Report and Annexure 2 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed quashing all proceedings pursuant to Annexure 2.

¶27

Heard Sri.K.R.Sajith, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.C.S. Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri.K. Biju, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4.

¶28

The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought for by the petitioner on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the

¶29

¶30

CRL.MC NO. 4073 OF 2022

¶31

respondents 3 and 4 have sworn Annexure 3 and Annexure 4 affidavits respectively. The aforesaid affidavits indicate that, the matter has been settled and the respondents 3 and 4 have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner herein. They also conveyed that they have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioner herein. The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the respondents 3 and 4 have reiterated that,

¶32

they do not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner herein.

¶33

Going through the materials available on record, it is discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioner herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view

¶34

¶35

CRL.MC NO. 4073 OF 2022

¶36

that going by the decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and

¶37

Another [2012(4) KLT 108], this is a fit case in which the powers

¶38

of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

¶39

can be invoked.

¶40

Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.1467/2019 of Piravom Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.240/2021 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Piravom as against the petitioner are

¶41

hereby quashed.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

¶44

scs

¶45

CRL.MC NO. 4073 OF 2022

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4073/2022

¶48

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure1CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
1467/19 OF PIRAVAM POLICE STATION.
Annexure2CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CC. 240/21 (CRIME NO. 1467/19) OF
JFCM, PIRAVAM .
Annexure 3COMPROMISE AFFIDAVIT OF DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT CW-1 DATED7-2-2022.
Annexure 4COMPROMISE AFFIDAVIT OF INJURED CW-2
DATED 7-2-2022

Saju P Mathew v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saju P Mathew 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

Krishnan M Nair Vs State of Kerala

Salim Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf Vs the State of Kerala

Ebin Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Sajith George Vs V.K. Praveen Kumar

Naisam Vs the Station House Officer