Allowed

Vipin.v.B. @ Vinil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Sept 2023Crl.MC/4892/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed Criminal Misc. Case to quash criminal proceedings against petitioners in C.C. No. 159/2021 following a settlement between the accused and the de facto complainant, citing lack of public purpose for continuance.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. allowed; proceedings in C.C.No.159 of 2021 before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sulthanbathery quashed.

Vipin.v.B. @ Vinil 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 GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 27TH BHADRA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 4892 OF 2023

¶5

CRIME NO.115/2021 OF KENICHIRA POLICE STATION, WAYANAD
CC 159/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,

¶6

SULTHANBATHERY

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1VIPIN.V.B. @ VINIL
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.BABU,
VILAKKUMPADAM VEEDU,
KOLERY.P.O.,
POOTHADI AMSOM,
WAYANAD,
PIN - 673596
2SYAM.M.G.
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O.GOPI, MUNDIYANIYIL HOUSE,
KOLERY.P.O., POOTHADI AMSOM,
WAYANAD, PIN - 673596
3SANEESH.V.T. @ KUNJOOTTAN
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.THANKAPPAN,
VELLARAMKUNNEL HOUSE,
KOLERY.P.O., POOTHADI AMSOM,
WAYANAD., PIN - 673596
4SREEKESH.P.V.
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O.VINEESH, PULIKKAL HOUSE,
KOLERY.P.O., POOTHADI AMSOM,
WAYANAD.,
PIN - 673596
BY ADVS.
RAJESH VIJAYAN
SIKHA S.NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶10

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

¶11

Crl.MC No.4892 of 2023

¶12

¶13

2SIVADATH
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O.SANTHOSH, ULLANIYIL HOUSE,
KOLERY.P.O., POOTHADI AMSOM,
WAYANAD, PIN - 673596
BY ADV MAHESH V MENON

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN (PP)

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
18.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Crl.MC No.4892 of 2023

¶18

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.115 of 2021 of Kenichira Police Station, Wayanad, which is now pending as C.C.No.159 of 2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sulthanbathery, alleging commission of offences under Sections 341, 323 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

The allegation against the petitioners is that they wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and assaulted the defacto complainant and when the mother of the defacto complainant came to the spot, they tried to assault the mother of the defacto complainant and thereby, the petitioners committed the offences alleged against them.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners and the defacto complainant were friends and the complaint came to be filed on the basis of a misunderstanding and on account of disputes of trivial nature between the petitioners and the defacto complainant. It is submitted that no such incident took place. It is submitted that all issues between the petitioners and the

¶23

Crl.MC No.4892 of 2023

¶24

¶25

defacto complainant have been settled and the defacto complainant does not wish to proceed with the prosecution of the case. It is submitted that the mother of the defacto complainant has also filed an affidavit stating that she also does not wish to continue with the prosecution.

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant would confirm that the defacto complainant and the mother of the defacto complainant have filed affidavits stating that they do not wish to continue with the prosecution against the petitioners.

¶27

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

¶28

the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant and keeping in mind the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan ; (2019) 5 SCC 688 , I am of the view that the proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed on the ground of settlement. No public purpose would be served by continuing with the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.159 of 2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sulthanbathery. The chance of a successful

¶29

Crl.MC No.4892 of 2023

¶30

¶31

prosecution are also minimal in the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶32

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.159 of 2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Sulthanbathery will stand quashed.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

GOPINATH P., JUDGE

¶35

rkj

¶36

Crl.MC No.4892 of 2023

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4892/2023

¶39

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME
NO.115/2021 OF KENICHIRA POLICE STATION,
WAYANAD DISTRICT AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.
Annexure 2CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.115/2021 OF KENICHIRA POLICE
STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS.
Annexure 3TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
13.06.2023 EXECUTED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Annexure 4AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE MOTHER OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT WHO IS CW2 IN CRIME
NO.115/2021 OF KENICHIRA POLICE STATION,
WAYANAD DISTRICT.

Vipin.v.B. @ Vinil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin.v.B. @ Vinil 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

John Vijayakumar Vs State of Kerala

Maheen Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Babu Vs State of Kerala

Kurunnan Divakaran Vs Kurunnan Vimala

Rajeshkumar @ Giri Vs State of Kerala

Vasanthi Vs State of Kerala