Allowed

Ahammed Sayid v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jul 2022Crl.MC/644/2022

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 invoked its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. applying principles from Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, noting the dispute was private and settled, and the continuation of proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose.

What did the court decide?

The Crl.M.C. was allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.141 of 2019 and the FIR were quashed.

Ahammed Sayid Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.M.C.No.644/22

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶7

CRL.MC NO. 644 OF 2022

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 AHAMMED SAYID, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KADAR, PADATHUM KUZHI HOUSE, KANTHAPURAM, UNNIKULAM P.O., KOZHIKODE. KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 574.

¶10

2 MUHAMMED RISHAM, AGED 22 YEARS, MUHAMMED RISHAM, S/O.MUHAMMED ALI, KOODATHINGAL HOUSE, MANIPURAM P.O., KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE., PIN – 673 572. BY ADVS. T.D.SUSMITH KUMAR C.SIVADAS T.O.DEEPA

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031.

¶13

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 571.

¶14

Crl.M.C.No.644/22

¶15

¶16

3 MUHAMMED IYAS, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.ABU K.P, PILASSERI VEETTIL HOUSE, PULLAVOOR, NIT P.O, KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE. KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673 601.

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.644/22

O R D E R

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.721 of 2018 of Kunnamangalam Police station which is now pending as C.C.No.141 of 2019 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamangalam. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 506(ii), read with 149 IPC.

¶22

The prosecution case is that on 09.11.2018 at 5 pm, the petitioners herein along with 30 other persons formed themselves into unlawful assembly and assaulted the 3^rd respondent. Annexure-A1 is the FIR and Annexure-A2 is the final report submitted by the police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2.

¶23

Heard Sri.Susmith Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.Jeril Babu, learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent.

¶24

Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure3 affidavit sworn by the 3^rd respondent/de facto complainant is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 3^rd respondent/de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the

¶25

Crl.M.C.No.644/22 4

¶26

proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent/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.

¶27

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.

¶28

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-2 final report submitted in Crime No.721 of 2018 of Kunnamangalam Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.141 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamangalam, as against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

DG/21.7.22

Crl.M.C.No.644/22

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 644/2022

¶35

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶36

Annexure1	A CERTIFIED COPY OF DATED 15-11-2018 IN KUNNAMANGALAM POLICE	THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS CRIME NO.721 OF 2018 OF STATION.
Annexure2	A CERTIFIED COPY OF DATED 19-02-2018 OF STATION.	FINAL REPORT NO.235/19 KUNNAMANGALAM POLICE
Annexure3	AFFIDAVIT DATED 19-0 RESPONDENT.	1-2022 SWORN BY THE 3RD

Ahammed Sayid v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahammed Sayid 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

Shaniraj Vs State of Kerala

Jolly George Vs State of Kerala

Ashokan Vs State of Kerala

Dileepan. K Vs State of Kerala

Sundardas, Vs State of Kerala

Benny Varghese Vs State of Kerala