Allowed

Sarath Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Feb 2024Crl.MC/2/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings against three accused persons charged with offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 308, 326, and 149 of the IPC. The Court allowed the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after finding that the dispute had been amicably settled and continuing the proceedings would serve no public interest.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings in Crime No. 1265/2023 against the petitioners were quashed; the Crl.M.C. was allowed.

Sarath Kumar 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

MONDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 23RD MAGHA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 2 OF 2024

¶6

CRIME NO.1265/2023 OF Kondotty Police Station, Malappuram

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 3:

¶8

1 SARATH KUMAR AGED 30 YEARS S/O. CHANDRAN, ANUGRAHAM HOUSE, FAROKE COLLEGE P.O, KOZHIKODE DIST, PIN - 673632

¶9

2 MUHAMMED BASHEER AGED 29 YEARS S/O. ABDUNNASAR, MACHILAKATH HOUSE, FAROKE COLLEGE PO., KOZHIKODE DIST, PIN - 673632

¶10

3 SHAHEER ANAS AGED 29 YEARS S/O. BASHEER, VARENGAL HOUSE, THURAKKAL PO., KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DIST, PIN - 673638

¶11

BY ADVS. SOJAN MICHEAL JENCY MICHEAL

¶12

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED:

¶13

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

¶14

2 JUNAIS AGED 40 YEARS S/O. SAITHALAVI, NAIKKOTTAKKAL HOUSE, KANNAMVETTIKKAVU, CHERUKAVU, MALAPPURAM DIST, PIN - 673637

¶15

3 SHAMSUDHEEN AGED 32 YEARS S/O. ABDURAHIMANKUTTY, PARAMBIL HOUSE, KANNAMVETTIKKAVU, CHERUKAVU, MALAPPURAM DIST, PIN - 673637

¶16

4 PRASANNAN AGED 41 YEARS S/O. NEELAKANDAN, AKKARAMMALPURAI HOUSE,

¶17

CRL.MC NO. 2 OF 2024

¶18

¶19

KANNAMVETTIKKAVU, CHERUKAVU, MALAPPURAM DIST, PIN - 673637

¶20

5 UNAIS AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SAITHALAVI, PARAMBIL HOUSE, KANAMVETTIKKAVU, CHERUKAVU, MALAPPURAM DIST, PIN - 673637

¶21

SHRI V.S. BOBAN-R, SHRI ASHI M.C.-P.P.

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶24

Crl.M.C No. 2 of 2024

¶25

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2024

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

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

¶28

Petitioners are the accused 1 to 3 in Crime No. 1265/2023 of Kondotty Police Station, Malappuram registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 326, 308 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 2 to 5 are the defacto complainant and the injured witnesses.

¶29

According to the prosecution, on 22.10.2023, at 5.00 p.m., the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and attacked the de facto complainant and his friends and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

CRL.MC NO. 2 OF 2024

¶34

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.

¶35

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 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].

¶36

I have perused Annexures 3 to 6 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.

¶37

CRL.MC NO. 2 OF 2024

¶38

¶39