Allowed

Vincent v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Apr 2023Crl.MC/788/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings against five petitioners under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court was satisfied that the matter had been settled amicably and no public interest was involved, deeming continued proceedings futile.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.1347 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Varkala are quashed.

Vincent 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 788 OF 2023

¶6

CC 1347/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, VARKALA PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1-5 :

¶7

1 VINCENT, AGED 47 YEARS,

¶8

PUTHUVALL HOUSE, THAZHAMPALLI DESOM, THARKARA VILLAGE, ANJUTHENGU, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 309

¶9

2 BINU, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O PETER, SHINBIN VILLA VEEDU, PULLUTHURUTHI, SARKARA VILLAGE, KDAKKAM DESOM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 303

¶10

3 FRANCIS, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O ALBERT, MALIKA VEEDU SARKARA VILLAGE, THAZHAMBALI DESOM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 303

¶11

4 JHONSON, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O ALEXANDER, MALIKAVEEDU, SARKARA VILLAGE, THAZHAMBALLI, THIRUVANATHAPUTRAM, PIN - 695303

¶12

5 JOSE, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O LUKAS, LILLY BHAVAN, SARKAR VILLAGE, THAZHAMBALI DESOM, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 303

¶13

BY ADV M.R.SARIN

¶14

CRL.MC NO. 788 OF 2023

¶15

¶16

RESPONDENTS/ STATE/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

¶17

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

¶18

2 SHIBU, SNEHALAYAM VEEDU, PLLIPURAYADOM CHAMBAVU, KADAKKAVOOR, ANJUTHENGU, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, KERALA , PIN – 695 309

¶19

ADDL.R3 TO R5 IS IMPLEADED

¶20

3 ANTONY S/O ANTO, EDHAN HOUSE, KADAKKAVOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 308

¶21

4 BAIJU, S/O. OUSEPH, BETLEHEM VEEDU, KADAKAVOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 308

¶22

5 VARGHES, S/O ISAACH, PURAM VEEDU, ANJUTHENGU, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 308

¶23

*** ADDL.R3 TO R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.03.2023 IN CRL.M.A.NO.1/2023**

¶24

BY ADVS. Sneha joy M.R.SARIN

¶25

BY SMT.SEETHA S., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶26

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING :

¶27

CRL.MC NO. 788 OF 2023

¶28

¶29

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶30

-------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.788 of 2023

¶31

Dated this the 5^th day of April, 2023

¶32

ORDER

¶33

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

¶34

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 5 in C.C. No.1347 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Varkala, arising out of Crime No.784/2018 of Anjuthengu Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 294(b), 323, 324 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2^nd respondent is the defacto complainant and additional respondents 3 to 5 are the injured witnesses.

¶35

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

¶36

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.

¶37

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High

¶38

CRL.MC NO. 788 OF 2023

¶39

¶40

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

¶41

I have perused Annexure A3 to Annexure A6 affidavits filed by respondents 2 to 5. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto complainant and the other deponents stand 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.

¶42

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.1347 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Varkala are quashed.

¶43

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶44

Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶45

RKM

¶46

CRL.MC NO. 788 OF 2023

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 788/2023

¶49

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶50

Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO : 784/2018 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT VARKALA -I , THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶51

Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CC NO : 1347/2019 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT VARKALA -I , THIRUVANATHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶52

Annexure A3 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶53

Annexure A4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Annexure A5 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶54

Annexure A6 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT

Vincent v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vincent 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

Imbichikoya P.K., Vs the Authorized Officer, South Indian Bank Limited

Biju A.J Vs State of Kerala

Ajmal Vs State of Kerala

Nasarudeen Vs Nazeer

Dhanya.G.Nair, Vs State of Kerala

Akhil Vs State of Kerala