Allowed

Rajendran v. Karikrishnan

Kerala HC3 Apr 2024Crl.MC/3038/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of proceedings for offences under Sections 324 and 308 r/w Section 34 IPC on the ground that the dispute with the defacto complainant was amicably settled. Relying on Gian Singh and allied decisions, and noting the genuine affidavit of settlement, the court quashed all pending proceedings.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.1343 of 2021 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nadapuram were quashed; Crl.M.C allowed.

Rajendran Vs Karikrishnan — 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3038 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.357 OF 2021 OF KUTTIYADI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONERS :

¶8

1 RAJENDRAN AGED 45 YEARS S/O KUNJJIRAMAN,VADAKKEKKOLI HOUSE, VELAM PERUVAYAL.P.O, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶9

2 AMAL, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O. RAJENDRAN, VADAKKEKKOLI HOUSE, VELAM PERUVAYAL P.O., VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶10

BY ADVS. M.PROMODH KUMAR MAYA CHANDRAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS :

¶12

1 KARIKRISHNAN S/O KANARAN, ONTHATH HOUSE, VELAM, PERUVAYAL.P.O, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE-673008.

¶13

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY ADV ELDHO PAUL

¶15

SMT. SREEJA V., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶17

03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 3038 OF 2021

¶19

¶20

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶21

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

¶22

Crl.M.C.No.3038 of 2021

¶23

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

¶24

Dated this the 3^rd day of April, 2024

¶25

ORDER

¶26

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

¶27

Petitioners are accused in C.C. No.1343 of 2021 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nadapuram, arising out of Crime No.357 of 2021 of Kuttiyadi Police Station, registered for the offence under Sections 324 and 308 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The first respondent is the defacto complainant.

¶28

According to the prosecution, on 28.06.2021, the accused had assaulted the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10

¶32

¶33

CRL.MC NO. 3038 OF 2021

¶34

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].

¶35

I have perused Annexure-2 affidavit filed by the first 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.

¶36

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.1343 of 2021 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nadapuram are quashed.

¶37

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶38

Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶39

RKM

¶40

CRL.MC NO. 3038 OF 2021

¶41

¶42

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3038/2021

¶43

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

¶44

Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.357/2021 OF KUTTIADY POLICE STATION DATED 29.06.2021. Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 05.07.2021. Annexure -3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 27.09.2021 IN CRIME NO.0357/2021 OF KUTTYADI POLICE

Rajendran v. Karikrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendran v. Karikrishnan

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

Asif Shajidh, Vs State of Kerala

Fidha Nishad Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Samad.S Vs State of Kerala

Deepu Chandran @ Manikandan Vs Nikhil

Shyju Vs State of Kerala

Justin .K.Thomas Vs State of Kerala