Allowed

Murshid Hiban v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Mar 2024Crl.MC/1161/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Miscellaneous petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings against four accused persons. The court held that the dispute had been amicably settled by the respondents, rendering the continuance of criminal proceedings futile and contrary to public interest.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against the petitioners in C.P. No.60/2022 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nilambur are quashed.

Murshid Hiban Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1161 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.699/2022 OF Nilambur Police Station, Malappuram

¶7

CP NO.60 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NILAMBUR PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1-4 :

¶8

1 MURSHID HIBAN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMAD KUTTY, CHAPPNGAL HOUSE, PANDIPPUZHA, POOKKOTTUMANNA, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 329

¶9

2 RAFEEQ AGED 32 YEARS, S/OHAMSA, PULIKKAL HOUSE, CHANDAKKUNNU P.O., NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 329

¶10

**3. SALMAN UL FARIS, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMADALI, MUNJAKKAL HOUSE, POOKKOTTUMANNA, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM – 679 329 3. SANEER K.P., S/O MUHAMMED.K.P., KALATHUMPADI P.O., CHOORAKAND, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 334 (THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE 3RD PETITIONER IS CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 14.03.2024 IN CRL.M.A.NO.1 OF 2024)

¶11

*4 FAIS, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.SAKIR HUSSAIN, KATOORAN HOUSE, MUKKATTA, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM – 679 330

¶12

4. SABAB.P, S/O MUHAMMAD ALI, PATTTIKKADAN HOUSE, CHUNGATHARA.P.O. KUTTIMUNDA, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 334

¶13

CRL.MC NO. 1161 OF 2023

¶14

¶15

***(THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE 4TH PETITIONER IS CORRECTED AS PER ORDER DATED 14.03.2024 IN CRL.M.A.NO.1 OF 2024)**

¶16

BY ADV PRASAD CHANDRAN

¶17

RESPONDENTS/ STATE/ COMPLAINANT :

¶18

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

¶19

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR POLICE STATION NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 329

¶20

3 NOUSHADALI S/O MUMAMMED, KUTTASSERY HOUSE, VALORANGAL,PUNNAPPALA.PO, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 329

¶21

4 YOONUS. A.A

¶22

S/O ABDUL KAREEM, ALINGAL HOUSE, NIRANNA PARAMBUPORUR P.O, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 339

¶23

BY ADV ADITHYA RAJEEV

¶24

SRI. ASHI M.C., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶26

14.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

CRL.MC NO. 1161 OF 2023

¶28

¶29

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶30

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶31

Crl.M.C.No.1161 of 2023

¶32

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶33

Dated this the 14^th day of March, 2024

¶34

ORDER

¶35

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

¶36

Petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.P. No.60/2022 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nilambur, arising out of Crime No.699/2022 of Nilambur Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 308 and 201 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 3 and 4 are the defacto complainant and the injured witness.

¶37

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

¶38

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.

¶39

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

¶40

CRL.MC NO. 1161 OF 2023

¶41

¶42

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].

¶43

I have perused Annexure A3 and Annexure A4 affidavits filed by respondents 3 and 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto complainant and the other deponent 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.

¶44

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.P. No.60/2022 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nilambur are quashed.

¶45

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶46

Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶47

RKM

¶48

CRL.MC NO. 1161 OF 2023

¶49

¶50

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1161/2023

¶51

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶52

Annexure1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 699 OF 2022 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION Annexure2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.P.NO.60/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, COURT NILAMBUR,MALAPPURAM AnnexureA3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTARY ATTESTED AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/ NOUSHADALI DATED 24.01.2023 AnnexureA4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTARY ATTESTED AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT / YOONUS DATED 24.01.2023

Murshid Hiban v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murshid Hiban 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

Muhammed Anees, Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Sarada T.S Vs the State of Kerala

Abhijith @ Abith, Vs State of Kerala

Shirly Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Edatharammal Ranjith Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

P Venugopal Vs Vismaya Venturres(India)Private Ltd.