Allowed

Ashif C., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jul 2024Crl.MC/3663/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in an assault and unlawful assembly case sought quashing of proceedings after settlement with the defacto complainant and injured witness. Relying on settled law permitting quashing on amicable resolution, and noting verified affidavits confirming the settlement, the High Court quashed all proceedings against the accused.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against petitioners in C.C.No.75 of 2019 before JFCM Court-I, Perambra quashed.

Ashif C., 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 8TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3663 OF 2024

¶6

CRIME NO.728/2018 OF Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.75 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PERAMBRA
PETITIONERS:

¶8

1ASHIF C.,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O.PAKKU,
CHALIL HOUSE,
MENNANIAM P.O,
PERAMBRA,
KOYILANDI KOZHIKODE,
PIN - 673525
2MUHAMMED MISHAB,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. ABDURAHIMAN,
VALOORPOYIL HOUSE,
CHENOLOI,
KOYILANDI,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673525
3SANJEEV SATHYAN,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. SATHYAN,
MANGARA HOUSE,
NOCHAT P.O,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673001
BY ADVS.
ROSHINI UDAYAKUMAR
ROSHITHA A.U.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2 MUHAMMED AKMAL, AGED 22 YEARS S/0. ASEES, AGED 22 YEARS, CHERIYAPURAYIL HOUSE,

¶12

¶13

CRL.MC NO. 3663 OF 2024

¶14

PERAMBRA, KOYILANDI,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673525
3MUHAMMED NAJI,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O. MAJEED,
PERAMBRA P.O.,
KOYILANDI,
KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673525

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SRI. ASHI M.C (PP)

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 3663 OF 2024

¶19

¶20

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶21

Crl.M.C. No. 3663 of 2024

¶22

Dated this the 8^th day of July, 2024

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash all proceedings against them.

¶25

Petitioners are the accused in C.C. No.75 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Perambra, arising out of Crime No. 728 of 2018 of Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode, registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 323 and 324 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 2 and 3 are the defacto complainant and the injured witness.

¶26

According to the prosecution, the accused had on 11-12-2018 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the defacto complainant and the injures witness and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from the learned

¶28

¶29

CRL.MC NO. 3663 OF 2024

¶30

Public Prosecutor.

¶31

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.

¶32

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].

¶33

I have perused Annexure A4 and Annexure A5 affidavits filed by respondents 2 and 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 deponent 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

¶34

CRL.MC NO. 3663 OF 2024

¶35

¶36

futility.

¶37

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.75 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Perambra are quashed.

¶38

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶41

AJM

¶42

CRL.MC NO. 3663 OF 2024

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3663/2024

¶45

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶46

Annexure A1TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. CRIME
NO. 728 OF 2018 PERAMBRA POLICE
STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
Annexure A2TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO:
728/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE
JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD , KOZHIKODE
Annexure A3TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO:
728/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-
I,PERAMBRA
Annexure A4THEORIGINALAFFIDAVITSOLEMNLY
AFFIRMED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO
COMPLAINANT DATED 22.02.2024
Annexure A5THEORIGINALAFFIDAVITSOLEMNLY
AFFIRMEDBYTHE3RD
RESPONDENT/CW2/INJURED DATED 22.02.2024
Annexure A6TRUE COPY OF THE OF JUDGEMENT DATED
22.01.2020 OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE
BOARD KOZHIKODE

Ashif C., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashif C., 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

Lijo Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Latheef Vs State of Kerala

Govardhanan B S Vs State of Kerala

Sabna Vs Sajeer Khan T.A.

Vijayarajan N., Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rasheed Vs Shamla