Allowed

T.S Roger v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Dec 2022Crl.MC/730/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 406 and 420 IPC against office bearers of an educational society. Finding the dispute private in nature with a valid settlement acknowledged by the complainant, the Court invoked Section 482 CrPC to stop further prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. allowed; Annexure-2 final report quashed; all further proceedings in C.C. No. 101/2021 against petitioners quashed.

T.S Roger 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

TUESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022/15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 730 OF 2022

¶6

C.C.NO.101/2021 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KOZHIKOD

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 T.S ROGER AGED 39 YEARS TC 53 1643, RESONANCE, SATHYAN NAGAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695004

¶9

2 ANIJA S.R AGED 37 YEARS TC 53 1643, RESONANCE, SATHYAN NAGAR, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695001 BY ADVS. R.SUNIL KUMAR A.SALINI LAL ARUN KRISHNA

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 682031, PIN - 682031

¶12

2 K.V/PRANAV AGED 24 YEARS RESIDING AT KOTHAVALPPIL, PUTHIYANGADI P.O, KOZHIKODE 673021, PIN - 673021 BY ADV S.ANIL (PADINJAREKOTA) ADV. SREEJA V. - Sr. PP

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.730/2022

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 6^th day of December, 2022

¶18

The petitioners are the accused in crime No.74/2021 of Kozhikode Town Police Station, which is now pending as C.C. No.101/2021 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kozhikode. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The prosecution case is that, the petitioners who were office bearers of one Alpha Mary Educational Society have collected an amount of `4 lakhs from the defacto complainant, for obtaining Visa for the defacto complainant to go to Malta for eduction purposes. Later, they failed to arrange the Visa as offered and the amount was also not repaid. Annexure-1 is the F.I.R. and Annexure-2 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2 final report.

¶20

Heard Sri. R. Sunil Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.730/2022

¶22

: 3 :

¶23

Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. S. Anil (Padinjarekota), the learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶24

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-3 affidavit sworn by the 2^nd respondent is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 2^nd respondent 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 the 2^nd respondent also confirms the same. The veracity of the settlement was verified by the learned Public Prosecutor through the Station House Officer and it was found that the defacto complainant is now working at Polo. However, the confirmation regarding the settlement was conveyed to the Station House Officer concerned through the parents of the defacto complainant.

¶25

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] ,

¶26

Crl.M.C.No.730/2022

¶27

: 4 :

¶28

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.

¶29

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-2 final report submitted in crime No.74/2021 of Kozhikode Town Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No.101/2021 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kozhikode, against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶30

Sd/ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

ncd

Crl.M.C.No.730/2022

: 5 :

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 730/2022

¶35

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 ATTESTED COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NUMBER 74/2021 OF KOZHIKODE TOWN POLICE STATION Annexure 2 ATTESTED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC: NO: 101/2021 BEFORE THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT KOZHIKODE Annexure 3 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY 2ND RESPONDENT

T.S Roger v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.S Roger 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

M.J.Vijayapadman Vs K.R.Ajithkumar

Abdul Sathar.K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Sree Gokulam Chit and Finance Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev Vs the Detective Inspector

V.Salim Vs the State of Kerala

Moosa Vs State of Kerala