Allowed

Aneesh. P v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Feb 2022Crl.MC/490/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, quashed the criminal proceedings against the petitioner in the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasargod. The case arose from an allegation of assault under IPC Sections 341, 323, 324, and 308. The court noted the settlement between the petitioner and injured respondents, their refusal to pursue the case, and the acquittal of other co-accused. Proceedings were all

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings against the petitioner in S.C.No.340 of 2021 in the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasargod arising from Crime No.757 of 2014 of Hosdurg Police Station are quashed and the petiti

Aneesh. P 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 K.HARIPAL

¶4

MONDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 18TH MAGHA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 490 OF 2022

¶6

[S.C.No.340 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasargod arising from Crime No.757 of 2014 of Hosdurg Police Station]

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

ANEESH. P AGED 29 YEARS S/O ASHOKAN, POYYAKKARA HOUSE, POYYAKKARA, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, CHITHARI P.O, KASARAGOD KASARGOD, PIN - 671316 BY ADVS. RAHUL SASI NEETHU PREM VIVEK.P.K MANU K. MURALI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 VIPIN. V AGED 30 YEARS S/O VASU, POYYAKKARA HOUSE, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, CHITHARI P.O, KASARAGOD. KASARGOD, PIN - 671316 3 PRAVEEN. K AGED 32 YEARS S/O KUNHIRAMAN, POYYAKKARA HOUSE, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, CHITHARI P.O, KASARAGOD KASARGOD, PIN - 671316 BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR NIRMAL V NAIR

¶11

Crl.M.C.No.490 of 2022

¶12

:-2-:

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SR.PP - SRI. NOUSHAD K.A.

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.M.C.No.490 of 2022

¶17

:-3-:

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The first accused in Crime No.757 of 2014 of

¶20

Hosdurg Police Station has moved this Court for quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement reached with respondents 2 and 3, who are the injured. The crime was registered on 6.7.2014 on the basis of the first information furnished by the third respondent alleging offences under Sections 341,323,324,308 read with Section 34 of IPC. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was laid against four persons and the petitioner is the first accused. The petitioner thereafter remained absconding and accused Nos.2 to 4 faced trial in S.C.No.440 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasargod. By Annexure A3 judgment dated 26.2.2018 in S.C.No.440 of 2016, they were acquitted under Section 232 of Cr.P.C. Now the case against the petitioner has been refiled as S.C.No.340 of 2021. It is submitted that the matter is settled with respondents 2 and 3 and the entire proceedings are sought to be quashed.

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.490 of 2022

¶22

:-4-:

¶23

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶24

also the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor also has confirmed the settlement. Annexures

¶25

A6 and A7 affidavits of the party respondents indicate that the matter is settled.

¶26

It is alleged that on 6.7.2014 at 4.30 p.m., the accused persons, four in number, in furtherance of their common intention had assaulted and injured respondents 2 and 3 with iron pipe and thus committed attempts to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Annexures A4 and A5 wound certificates do not indicate

¶27

that the respondents have suffered any injury. The second respondent was taken to the hospital on 6.7.2014 with pain on the back of left ear. Similarly, the third respondent also did not have any injury on his person. He had complained of headache, neck pain and nose bleed and the injuries were simple in nature.

¶28

As indicated earlier, other accused persons were acquitted under Section 232 of Cr.P.C., after examining

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.490 of 2022

¶30

:-5-:

¶31

respondents 2 and 3 as well, who did not support the prosecution case. The averments in the affidavits also indicate that the matter is settled. They do not want to pursue the case. In the above circumstances, entire proceedings against the petitioner in S.C.No.340 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasaragod arising from Crime No.757 of 2014 of Hosdurg Police Station are quashed and the petitioner shall stand exonerated.

¶32

The Crl.M.C. is allowed.

sd/-

K.HARIPAL, Judge

MBS/

Crl.M.C.No.490 of 2022

¶37

:-6-:

¶38

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 490/2022

¶39

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶40

Annexure	A1 THE CERTIFIED OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO. 757 OF 2014 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION
Annexure	A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 757 OF 2014 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION.
Annexure	A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.02.2018 IN S.C. 440 OF 2016 BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT-II, KASARAGOD.
Annexure	A4 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Annexure	A5 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Annexure	A6 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 22.09.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Annexure	A7 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 22.09.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Aneesh. P v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aneesh. P 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Shajeer C. Vs State of Kerala

Noufal Vs State of Kerala

Safvan @ Sarfu, Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Riyas, Vs State of Kerala

Jithinraj Vs State of Kerala