Allowed

Suresh Babu P.G v. Musthafa A.K

Kerala HC26 Jul 2024Crl.MC/3587/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash proceedings against eight accused persons. Relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding settlement, the court found the matter was amicably resolved with no public interest, and quashed the proceedings in the Special Court case arising from offences under the POA Act and IPC.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against the petitioners in Special Court No. 775 of 2016 are quashed.

Suresh Babu P.G Vs Musthafa A.K — 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

FRIDAY, THE 26^TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 4TH SRAVANA, 1946

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3587 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.674/2015 OF Nattukal Police Station, Palakkad

¶7

SC NO.775 OF 2016 OF SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (PREVENTION OF

¶8

ATTROCITIES)

¶9

PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 8 :

¶10

1 SURESH BABU P.G AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDAN NAIR, KANDATH HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶11

2 NAZAR P. AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. KUNJI VEERAN, POOCHAPPARA, BHEEMANAD, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶12

3 UDAYAN AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. RAMAN, PURAMBOKKIL HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶13

4 RAFEEQUE

¶14

AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. SYEDALAVI, ACHIPRA HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶15

5 SUKUMARAN C AGED 47 YEARS

¶16

S/O. PALAN, CHAKKINGAL HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT,

¶17

PIN-678 601.

¶18

6 SHANAVAS A. AGED 43 YEARS, ACHIPRA HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶19

7 ANIL KUMAR K.

¶20

AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDAN KUTTY NAIR, KANDATH HOSUE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶21

CRL.MC NO. 3587 OF 2020

¶22

¶23

8 BALAKRISHNAN K.

¶24

AGED 60 YEARS, S/O. RAMAN, KOOMANCHERY HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶25

BY ADV K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)

¶26

RESPONDENTS/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/ INJURED PERSONS

¶27

& STATE OF KERALA:

¶28

1 MUSTHAFA A.K

¶29

AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. POKKAR SUJITH, ACHIPRA HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶30

2 ABDUL GAFOOR. A AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. KUNJAVARA, ACHIPRA HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶31

3 IRSHAD

¶32

AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. HAMZA, ACHIPRA HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM-I, BHEEMANAD, PALAKAKD DISTRICT, PIN-678 601.

¶33

4 STATE OF KERALA

¶34

REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NATTUKAL POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶35

BY ADV A.V.RAVI

¶36

SMT. SREEJA V., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶37

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶38

26.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

CRL.MC NO. 3587 OF 2020

¶40

¶41

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶42

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

¶43

Crl.M.C.No.3587 of 2020

¶44

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

¶45

Dated this the 26^th day of July, 2024

¶46

ORDER

¶47

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

¶48

Petitioners are accused 1 to 8 in S.C. No.775 of 2016 on the files of the Special Court for SC/ ST (POA) Act Cases, Mannarkkad, arising out of Crime No.674 of 2015 of Nattukal Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 506(ii), 201 and 308 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 1 to 3 are the defacto complainant as well as the injured witnesses.

¶49

According to the prosecution, the accused had on 07.11.2015 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the defacto complainant and the injured witnesses inflicting grievous injuries and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

¶53

CRL.MC NO. 3587 OF 2020

¶54

the proceedings.

¶55

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].

¶56

I have perused Annexure 3 to Annexure 5 affidavits filed by respondents 1 to 3. 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.

¶57

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in S.C. No.775 of 2016 on the files of the Special Court for SC/ ST (POA) Act Cases, Mannarkkad are quashed.

¶58

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶59

Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE

¶60

RKM

¶61

CRL.MC NO. 3587 OF 2020

¶62

¶63

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3587/2020

¶64

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶65

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.674/15 OF NATTUKAL POLICE STATION DATED 8.1.2015. ANNEXURE 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED IN CRIME NO.674 /2015, OF NATTUKAL POLICE STATION DATED 15.4.16. ANNEXURE 3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE IST RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT, DATED 30.7.2020. ANNEXURE 4 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/INJURED, DATED 30.7.2020. Annexure A5 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/INJURED, DATED 30.07.2020.

Suresh Babu P.G v. Musthafa A.K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Babu P.G v. Musthafa A.K

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

Gireesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Vs State of Kerala

Abdu Rahman Vs State of Kerala

Abdulla, Vs Sajeevan.E.G

Shaji.M Vs State of Kerala

S.B.Nazar Vs the State of Kerala