Allowed

Sameen Subair v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Mar 2023Crl.MC/1396/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings against petitioners under Sections 341, 294(b), 506(i), and 323 IPC. Invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court held that as the matter was settled and no public interest was involved, continuation of proceedings would be futile.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings in C.C.No.2221/2021 arising out of Crime No.1066/2021 at Kilikolloor Police Station are quashed.

Sameen Subair Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1396 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 2221/2021 OF JUDICIAL

¶7

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, KOLLAM

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2 :

¶9

1 SAMEEN SUBAIR, AGED 23 YEARS S/O SUBAIRKUTTY SANIA VEETIL (H), KOTTAIKAKOM CKP NAGAR, PERINAD P O, KOLLAM, PIN – 691 601.

¶10

2 FEBIN S., AGED 23 YEARS S/O SHERIFUDHEEN, VALATHINKAL P O, CHAKARIKADA JUNCTION, VAZHAKOOTTATHIL, IRAVIPURAM VILLAGE., PIN – 691 004.

¶11

BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH
ANILKUMAR C.R.

¶12

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE :

¶13

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

¶14

2AHAMMED YASEEN
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O SHAJAHAN, SIBINA MANZIL, VAIMUKKIL,
VADEKKEVILA, KOLLAM CITY, PIN – 691 010.
BY ADV ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN
PP SR.NOUSHAD K.A

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

CRL.MC 1396/2023

¶17

¶18

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J

¶19

......…..................................

¶20

Crl.M.C.No.1396 of 2023

¶21

…..................................

¶22

Dated this the 21^st day of March, 2023

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.

¶25

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C.No.2221/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Kollam, arising out of Crime No.1066/2021 of Kilikolloor Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 506(i), 323 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The 2^nd respondent is the defacto complainant.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be

¶28

CRL.MC 1396/2023

¶29

¶30

served by continuing the proceedings.

¶31

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC

¶32

303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC

¶33

466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

¶34

I have perused Annexure-II affidavit filed by the 2^nd respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the defacto complainant stands by the contents thereof.

¶35

The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that petitioner is involved in Crime No.1070/2021 of the Kilikolloor Police Station. However, since the matter has been settled with the defacto complainant, I find no reason to continue the proceedings and no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing.

¶36

CRL.MC 1396/2023

¶37

¶38

The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in

¶39

futility.

¶40

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in

¶41

C.C.No.2221/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class

¶42

Magistrate Court-1, Kollam, arising out of Crime No.1066/2021

¶43

of Kilikolloor Police Station, are quashed.

¶44

This Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed as above.

sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

JUDGE

AMV/22/03/2023

CRL.MC 1396/2023

¶50

¶51

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1396/2023

¶52

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶53

Annexure-ICERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO 1066/2021 OF KILIKOLLOOR
POLICE STATION, KOLLAM.
Annexure-IITHE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY
THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NO
1066/2021OFKILIKOLLOORPOLICE
STATION, KOLLAM.

¶54

TRUE COPY

Sameen Subair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sameen Subair 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

Eliamma Samuel Vs State of Kerala

Ashwin.B. Jayadevan Vs State of Kerala

Pramod P P Vs State of Kerala

Sunish Elavankal Vs the Payyannur Co-Op Town Bank Ltd.

Alex .a @ Anu Vs State of Kerala

Shahul Hameed, Vs State of Kerala