Allowed

Praveen @Mottambi v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Mar 2023Crl.MC/68/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings under IPC sections 341, 323, and 506(ii). Relying on cited precedents, the court held that since the matter was settled, continuing proceedings would be futile and no public interest was involved.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.1187/2018 arising out of Crime No.1244/2017 are quashed.

Praveen @Mottambi 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

MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 68 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.1244/2017 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 1187/2018 OF JUDICIAL

¶7

MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I MUVATUPUZHA

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :

¶9

1 PRAVEEN @ MOTTAMBI, AGED 40 YEARS S/O RAJAPPAN, ARIKKAPILLIL VEETTIL, ANIKAD KARA,MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUHZA THALUK,ERNAKULAM, PIN – 686 503.

¶10

2 SAJEEV RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 48 YEARS S/O RAMAKRISHNAN, ARIKKAPILLIL VEETTIL, ANIKAD KARA,MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUHZA THALUK,ERNAKULAM, PIN – 686 503.

¶11

3 MANU SAJEEV, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O SAJEEV RAMAKRISHNAN, ARIKKAPILLIL VEETTIL,ANIKAD KARA, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE,MUVATTUPUHZA THALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 686 503. BY ADVS. M.B.SANDEEP K.P.SREEJA AMAL STANLY

¶12

RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

¶13

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

¶14

2 AJIL RAJ, AGED 29 YEARS S/O VAMANAN, VETTIKKATTU HOUSE, NEAR PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, ANICADU,MOOVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN – 686 503. BY ADVS. V.VISAL AJAYAN VIJU CHAKKALACKAN(K/1018/1993)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

CRL.MC 68/2023

¶17

¶18

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J

¶19

......….................................. Crl.M.C.No.68 of 2023

¶20

….................................. Dated this the 27^th day of March, 2023

¶21

ORDER

¶22

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

¶23

Petitioners are accused in C.C.No.1187/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha, arising out of Crime No.1244/2017 of Muvattupuzha Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 506(ii) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The 2^nd respondent is the defacto complainant.

¶24

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

¶25

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 served by continuing the proceedings.

¶26

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303],

¶27

the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court

¶28

CRL.MC 68/2023

¶29

¶30

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

¶31

I have perused Annexure A3 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. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.

¶32

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.1187/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha, arising out of Crime No.1244/2017 of Muvattupuzha Police Station, are quashed.

¶33

The Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed as above.

¶34

sd/-

¶35

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶36

AMV/27/03/2023

¶37

CRL.MC 68/2023

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 68/2023

¶40

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶41

`ANNEXURE A1`	`CERTIFIED COPY OF`	`THE`	`FIRST INFO`	`RMATION`
	`REPORT` `IN` `CRI`	`ME`	`NO.` `12`	`44/2017`
	`REGISTERED BY THE` `STATION AT ERNAKULA`	`MUV` `M DI`	`ATTUPZUAH` `STRICT`	`POLICE`
`ANNEXURE A2`	`CERTIFIED COPY OF`	`THE`	`CHARGE SH`	`EET IN`
	`CC 1187/2018 ON TH` `JFCM COURT-I ,MUVA` `FROM ANNEXURE A1 FI`	`E FI` `TTUP` `R`	`LES OF HON` `UZHA WHICH`	`OURABLE` `AROUSE`
`ANNEXURE A3`	`THE ORIGINAL OF`	`THE`	`AFFIDAVIT`	`DATED`
	`7.12.2022` `SWORN` `RESPONDENT/DEFACTO`	`COMP`	`BY` `THE` `LAINANT`	`2ND`

¶42

TRUE COPY

Praveen @Mottambi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen @Mottambi 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

Ummer.K.M. Vs State of Kerala

Haroon Dilshad Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Siyad Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Vs State of Kerala

Sreeraj Vs State of Kerala

Dictto Vs State of Kerala