Allowed

Satheesan v. Roshidul Islam

Kerala HC7 Dec 2022Crl.MC/5980/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court quashed the charges and all further proceedings in the concerned criminal case based on the final police report and a confirmed settlement between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The petition was allowed; the final report and all further proceedings in C.C. No.51/2021 are quashed.

Satheesan Vs Roshidul Islam — Cheque Dishonour | 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 7^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022/16TH AGRAHAYANA,1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 5980 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCC 51/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOCHI

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 SATHEESAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O PRAKASAN, THAIVACHIDATHU HOUSE, KOYA BAZAR,KUMBALANGI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT KOCHI., PIN – 682007.

¶9

2 SAJEENDRAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O GOPINATHAN, THAIKKUKOVIL HOUSE, NEAR SBT, KUMBALANGI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KOCHI., PIN - 682007

¶10

BY ADVS.

¶11

T.N.LEKSHMI SHANKAR M.H.HANIS P.M.JINIMOL ANANDHU P.C. KRISHNA T.B.

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 ROSHIDUL ISLAM, AGED 23 YEARS S/O ABDHUI MUTHALIB, NOW RESIDING AT THOLATTU JOSHY'S HOUSE, NEAR CONVENT JUNCTION, KUMBALANGI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT MOB: 9126073774, PIN - 682007

¶14

2 FARIDHUL ISLAM, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O IRAJ ALI, NOW RESIDING AT THOLATTU JOSHY'S HOUSE, NEAR CONVENT JUNCTION, KUMBALANGI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT . MOB:6003041302, PIN - 682007

¶15

3 GEORGE LINTON, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH, THOLATTU HOUSE, NEAR CONVENT JUNCTION, KUMBALANGI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 682007

¶16

4 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV P.A.MUJEEB PP SRI VIPIN NARAYAN

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.5980/2022

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 7^th day of December, 2022

¶22

The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in crime No.1746/2019 of Palluruthy Police Station, which is now pending as C.C. No.51/2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kochi. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 447, 323, 294(b), 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

Annexure-1 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-1 final report.

¶24

Heard Sri. M.H. Hanis, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Vipin Narayanan, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. P.A. Muheeb, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶25

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has

¶26

Crl.M.C.No.5980/2022

¶27

: 3 :

¶28

been settled. Annexures-B to D affidavits sworn by respondent Nos.1 to 3 are filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavits, respondent Nos.1 to 3 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 respondent Nos.1 to 3 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.

¶29

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.

¶30

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-1 final report submitted in crime No.1746/2019 of Palluruthy Police

¶31

Crl.M.C.No.5980/2022

¶32

: 4 :

¶33

Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No.51/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kochi, against the

¶34

petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶35

Sd/ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

ncd

Crl.M.C.No.5980/2022

: 5 :

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5980/2022

¶40

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶41

Annexure A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL CHARGE IN CC NO 51/2021 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOCHI ARISING CRIME NO: 1746/2019 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. Annexure B AFFIDAVIT OF THE L ST RESPONDENT Annexure C AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure D AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Satheesan v. Roshidul Islam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satheesan v. Roshidul Islam

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

T.S Roger Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev Vs the Detective Inspector

V.Salim Vs the State of Kerala

Raji , W/O.Vikraman Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Nithin @ Nithen Clement, Vs State of Kerala

Beena R Vs State of Kerala