Allowed

Nithin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Jun 2024Crl.MC/3463/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A son accused under Section 324 IPC of assaulting his father, who later died, sought quashing of criminal proceedings after a settlement. The court verified affidavits from the legal heirs, confirmed no public interest remained, and quashed all proceedings in C.C.No.679/2023.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against petitioner in C.C.No.679/2023 at Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal, were quashed.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1946

¶3

CRL.MC NO. 3463 OF 2024

¶4

CRIME NO.805/2023 OF POTHENCODE POLICE STATION,

¶5

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶6

 IN CC NO.679 OF 2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST

¶7

CLASS -I,ATTINGAL

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

NITHIN
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O. SHARMA(LATE),
KALIYILKKADA VEEDU,
MOOZHIBHAGAM, ANDOORKONAM.P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695584

¶10

BY ADVS.
K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
N.P.ASHA

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE & VICTIMS:

¶12

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

¶13

2NITHA.L. SHARMA
AGED 19 YEARS
D/O. SHARMA. S (LATE),
MAKAYIRAM, ARIYOTTUKONAM,
ANDOORKONAM.P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695584

¶14

Crl.M.C.No.3463 of 2024

¶15

-:2:-

¶16

3LEENA.S
AGED 46 YEARS
W/O. SHARMA. S (LATE),
MAKAYIRAM, ARIYOTTUKONAM,
ANDOORKONAM.P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695584

¶17

BY ADV. SHAJIN S.HAMEED

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SRI.ASHI M.C
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

Crl.M.C.No.3463 of 2024

¶22

-:3:-

¶23

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. --------------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.3463 of 2024

¶24

Dated this the 5^th day of June, 2024

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against him.

¶27

Petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.679/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal, arising out of Crime No.805/2023 of Pothencode Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District, registered for the offences under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 2 and 3 are the defacto complainant and the injured witness. It is necessary to mention that petitioner is the son of the defacto complainant and that in the meantime, on 26.06.2023 the defacto complainant died. Respondents 2 and 3 are the daughter and wife of the deceased defacto complainant.

¶28

According to the prosecution, the accused had, on 10.05.2023, assaulted the defacto complainant using a pitcher vessel and thereby committed the offence alleged.

¶29

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

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioner ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of

¶31

-:4:-

¶32

Crl.M.C.No.3463 of 2024

¶33

offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

¶34

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].

¶35

I have perused Annexure- III and Annexure-I V affidavits filed by respondents 2 and 3 who are the legal heirs of the defacto complainant. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the legal heirs of the defacto complainant 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.

¶36

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.679/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal, are quashed.

¶37

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶40

Jka/05.06.24.

¶41

Crl.M.C.No.3463 of 2024

¶42

-:5:-

¶43

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3463/2024

¶44

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES

¶45

Annexure-ICERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO. 805/2023 OF POTHENCODE POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶46

Annexure-IIA TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF
THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
Annexure-IIINOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT DATED 03.04.2024 SWORN
BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 2

¶47

Annexure-IVNOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT DATED 03.04.2024 SWORN
BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 3

Nithin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nithin 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

Thyagarajan Vs State of Kerala

K.P.Geevarghese Alias Babu, Vs State of Kerala

Manjusha Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu @ Pappachan, Vs State of Kerala

P. C. Thomas Vs the District Police Chief

Gopakumar Vs State of Kerala