Allowed

Vineeth.K.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jul 2022Crl.MC/739/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a Criminal Miscellaneous petition to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner, who was a second accused. The Court found the dispute private and noted a valid settlement, applying an apex court precedent to halt the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings (C.C. No.113/2020) against the petitioner (3rd accused) in crime No.951/2016 are quashed and final report is taken.”

Vineeth.K.K 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. WEDNESDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY 2022/22ND ASHADHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 739 OF 2022

¶4

CC 113/2020 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,

¶5

HOSDURG

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

VINEETH.K.K AGED 32 YEARS AGED 32 YEARS, SON OF VIJAYAN, MANIKKOTH BASHEER, AJANOOR VILLAGE, KASARGOD DISTRICT KASARGOD, PIN - 671513 BY ADVS. P.K.SUBHASH K.REEHA KHADER

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 2. K.V.MADHAVAN AGED 54 YEARS AGED 54 YEARS, SON OF KUNHIKKANNAN, RESIDING AT PUTHIYAVALAPPU HOUSE, AJANUR VILLAGE, KASARGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671531 ADV. SREEJA V. -SR PP SRI. SREEHARI INDUKALADHARAN

¶10

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.739/2022

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2022

¶15

The petitioner is the 3^rd accused in crime No.951/2016 of Hosdurg Police Station, which is now pending as C.C. No.113/2020 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Hosdurg. The offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 427 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The prosecution case is that, on 14.09.2016 at 22.30 hours, the petitioner along with four other accused persons on account of political animosity, formed into an unlawful assembly and destroyed the office of Yuvachethana Arts Club. AnnexureA1 is the F.I.R. 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 final report.

¶17

Heard Sri. P.K. Subhash, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. Sreehari Indukaladharan,

¶18

Crl.M.C.No.739/2022

¶19

: 3 :

¶20

the learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

¶21

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought

¶22

mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-A3 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 petitioner herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent 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.

¶23

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.

¶24

Crl.M.C.No.739/2022

¶25

: 4 :

¶26

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure- A2 final report submitted in crime No.951/2016 of Hosdurg Police Station and C.C. No.113/2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Hosdurg, as against the petitioner, who is the 3^rd accused are hereby quashed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

ncd

Crl.M.C.No.739/2022

: 5 :

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 739/2022

¶33

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.951 OF 2016 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT Annexure2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.951 OF 2016 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT Annexure3 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2.

Vineeth.K.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vineeth.K.K 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

Pramod Ramakrishnan, Vs Prakash Ramakrishnan

Subin Mathew Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Prakashan K Vs State of Kerala

T.K.Noufel Vs the State of Kerala

Anees Vs State of Kerala

Sajesh P., Vs State of Kerala