Allowed

C.K Vijayan v. Subash Vasudevan

Kerala HC24 Jun 2022Crl.MC/710/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition for quashing criminal proceedings under IPC Sections 406, 409, 420, and 506(1) instituted by the victim after settlement. Court invoked inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings as dispute was private and settlement was genuine.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings in C.C.No.26/2017 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Ernakulam are hereby quashed.

C.K Vijayan Vs Subash Vasudevan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 710 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

C.K VIJAYAN
AGED 59 YEARS
FLAT- 6A,
VIJAYA GLIMPSES, JAWAHAR NAGAR
KADAVANTHARA, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE 682020
ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682020

¶8

BY ADV L.RAJESH NARAYAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1SUBASH VASUDEVAN
AGED 49 YEARS
FLAT NO.15 C,
DUKES SKYLINE IMPERIAL GARDEN, KALOOR,
KOCHI- 682025, PIN – 682025

¶11

2STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KADAVANTHARA POLICE STATION,
THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ERNAKULAM – 682 020
BY ADV. SUDHEER GOPALAKRISHNAN -PP

¶12

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶13

CRL.MC No.710 OF 2022

¶14

¶15

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.

¶16

=========================== CRL.MC. No.710 OF 2022

¶17

============================ Dated this the 24^th day of June, 2022

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner is accused in C.C. No.26/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Ernakulam which was filed by the 1^st respondent. The aforesaid case arose from Crime No.1387 /2013 of Kadavanthra Police Station which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 506 (1) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

¶20

The prosecution case is that the petitioner has collected an amount of Rs.3.4 crore from the 1^st respondent offering him attractive returns as an investment in the company in which the petitioner is the Managing Director. The aforesaid amounts were collected offering attractive returns and the petitioner failed to provide any returns and the amount were also not repaid. It is also alleged that when the amount was demanded by the 1^st respondent, petitioner threatened the 1^st respondent. Annexure-A1 is the F.I.R and Annexure-A2 is the final report. This

¶21

CRL.MC No.710 OF 2022

¶22

¶23

Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2 final report.

¶24

Heard Sri. Rajesh Narayanan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.P.S.Syamkuttan, learned Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent and Sri.Sudheer Gopalakrishnan, the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶25

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly for the reason that the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, Annexure A3 affidavit sworn by the 1^st respondent is produced. The fact of settlement is acknowledged in the aforesaid affidavit and it is also specifically stated that the 1^st respondent has no subsisting grievances against the petitioner herein. The 1^st respondent also clearly expressed his no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent also confirms the aforesaid settlement and supports the prayer sought for by the petitioner herein. The veracity of the settlement has been examined by the Station House Officer concerned by contacting the 1^st respondent.

¶26

On going through the nature of allegations as contained in Annexure-A2 final report, it can be seen that the dispute is

¶27

CRL.MC No.710 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

basically private in nature. No serious offences are attributed against the petitioner. Considering the settlement arrived at between the parties, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak and hence no fruitful purpose would be served if the proceedings are allowed to continue. Therefore, I am of the view that going by the decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4)KLT 108], this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked.

¶30

Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C.No.26/2017 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII, Ernakulam pursuant to Annexure-A2 final report submitted in Crime No.1387/2013 of Kadavanthra Police Station are hereby quashed.

¶31

Sd/ZIYAD RAHMAN A. A. JUDGE

¶32

¶33

CRL.MC No.710 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 710/2022

¶36

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶37

Annexure1CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.1387/2013
DATED 6.11.2013 OF KADAVANTHARA POLICE
STATION
Annexure2CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
30.6.2016 ON THE FILES OF THE HON'BLE
JFCM VIII, ERNAKULAM
Annexure3TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
18.1.2022 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT

C.K Vijayan v. Subash Vasudevan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.K Vijayan v. Subash Vasudevan

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

Jermaine Joseph Peter Vs State of Kerala

Abu Soofiyan Vs State of Kerala

Vishal Pavithran Vs State of Kerala

Aminakutty Vs State Police Chief

Sandeep Sabhjeet Yadav Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Kumar R Vs State of Kerala