Allowed

Amal Krishna v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Jun 2024Crl.MC/164/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings against accused persons after finding that the matter had been amicably settled. The court relied on affidavits and the public prosecutor's submission that no public interest was involved in continuing the case, holding it futile.

What did the court decide?

All criminal proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.593/2019 were quashed.

Amal Krishna Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 164 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.220/2019 OF TOWN WEST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.593 OF 2019
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,THRISSUR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4 :

¶6

1 AMAL KRISHNA, AGED 25 YEARS S/O SALESH, VIRUTHIYIL HOUSE, THALAVANIKKARA P.O., THALUR, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 001.

¶7

2 SOURAV RAJ, AGED 24 YEARS S/O CHANDRAN, KOTTAYIL HOUSE, VILAYUR P.O., VILAYUR WEST, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679309

¶8

3 YADHU KRISHNA V S AGED 23 YEARS S/O SUNIL KUMAR, VATTAKULAM HOUSE, VILVATTAM VILLAGE, RAMAVARMAPURAM, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 631.

¶9

4SIDHIQ SWALIH K A.,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O ABDUL RAHMAN, KARENGAL HOUSE,
PAZHUNNANA P.O., CHEMMANTHATTA,
THRISSUR, PIN – 680 501.
BY ADVS.
VIVEK.P.K
GADHA.S
SANDEEP SUKUMARAN
MOHAMED SHAREEF PARIYARATH
ASWIN V.C.

¶10

RESPONDENT/STTE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED

¶11

WITNESSES :

¶12

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

¶13

2 SREEJITH V B., AGED 25 YEARS S/O BALAN, VATTEKKATTU HOUSE, PENGAMUKKU, KATTAKAMPAL,

¶14

CRL.MC 164/2024

¶15

¶16

THRISSUR, PIN – 680 544.
3AJAYKRISHNA M G., AGED 24 YEARS
S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN,
MULLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
ENGANDIYUR DESOM, KUNDALIYUR P.O.,
THRISSUR, PIN – 680 616.

¶17

4SIBIN ELDHOSE
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O ELDHOSE A V, ACHAYATH HOUSE,
MAROTTICHAL P.O.,
MANNAMANGALAM, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 014.

¶18

RENJITH T.R (PP)
SHYAM KUMAR M.P FOR R2- R4

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

CRL.MC 164/2024

¶21

¶22

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.M.C.No.164 of 2024

¶25

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

¶26

Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2024

¶27

ORDER

¶28

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

¶29

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.593/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thrissur, arising out of Crime No.220/2019 of Thrissur West Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, and 323 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The second respondent is the de facto complainant and respondents 3 and 4 are the injured witnesses.

¶30

According to the prosecution, accused had on 05.03.2019 restrained the de facto complainant and assaulted him, and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶31

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

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to

¶33

CRL.MC 164/2024

¶34

¶35

be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

I have perused Annexure-A2, Annexure-A3 and Annexure-A4 affidavits filed by respondents 2 to 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the de facto complainant and 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.

¶39

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.593/2019

¶40

CRL.MC 164/2024

¶41

¶42

on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thrissur,

¶43

arising out of Crime No.220/2019 of Thrissur West Police Station, are

¶44

quashed.

¶45

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶46

sd/BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶47

AMV/04/06/2024

¶48

CRL.MC 164/2024

¶49

¶50

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 164/2024

¶51

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶52

`ANNEXURE A1`	`THE TRUE COPY OF` `OF EVIDENCE IN` `THRISSUR WEST POL`	`THE FINAL REPORT AND MEMO` `CRIME NO. 220 OF 2019 OF` `ICE STATION.`
`ANNEXURE A2`	`THE AFFIDAVIT` `RESPONDENT DATED`	`SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND` `23.12.2023.`
`ANNEXURE A3`	`THE AFFIDAVIT` `RESPONDENT DATED`	`SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD` `15.12.2023.`
`ANNEXURE A4`	`THE AFFIDAVIT` `RESPONDENT DATED`	`SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH` `23.12.2023.`

¶53

TRUE COPY

Amal Krishna v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amal Krishna 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

Shameena Vs the State of Kerala

Aboobacker Kv Vs Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services

Nasriya@Naseema B Vs State of Kerala

Prem Navas @ Hussain Vs State of Kerala

Sreehari Vs the State of Kerala

Rejith Vs State of Kerala