Allowed

Baiju John, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Feb 2024Crl.MC/37/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in a case for house-trespass and related offences sought quashing on the ground that the dispute with the defacto complainant had been settled. Relying on Gian Singh and allied decisions, the High Court found the settlement genuine and quashed all proceedings in the pending case.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.17/2019 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, North Paravur were quashed.

Baiju John, Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

CRL.MC NO. 37 OF 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945

¶7

CRL.MC NO. 37 OF 2020

¶8

CRIME NO.555/2018 OF Varappuzha Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 17/2019 OF JUDL. FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, III, NORTH PARAVUR (TEMPORARY)

¶9

PETITIONER/S:

¶10

BAIJU JOHN,
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O.LATE BABY JOHN, NEST CHIRAKKAKOM, VARAPPUZHA,
KOCHI.

¶11

BY ADV B.MOHANLAL

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

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

¶14

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VARAPUZHA POLICE STATION, VARAPUZHA P.O., ERNAKULAM - 683 517.

¶15

3AUGUSTINE MATHEW,
S/O.MATHAI, MUNDAYAMPILLI VEEDU, VENGOOR KARA, VENGOOR
P.O., ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM - 683 546.
BY ADVS.
SRI.JACOB P.ALEX
SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX
SHRI.MANU SANKAR P.

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (PP)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

CRL.MC NO. 37 OF 2020

¶20

¶21

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶22

==================== Crl.M.C.No.37 of 2020

¶23

===================== Dated this the 1^st day of February, 2024

¶24

ORDER

¶25

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

¶26

Petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.17/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, North Paravur, Ernakulam, arising out of Crime No.555/2018 of Varapuzha Police Station, Ernakulam District, registered for the offences under Sections 448, 427, 188 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The 3^rd respondent is the defacto complainant.

¶27

According to the prosecution, the accused had, tresspassed into the property, which was taken possession by the bank after threatening the Security Guard and thereby committed the offences alleged.

¶28

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶29

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

¶30

CRL.MC NO. 37 OF 2020

¶31

¶32

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(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 v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

¶33

I have perused Annexure A3 affidavit filed by the 3^rd 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 contends 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.

¶34

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner C.C.No.17/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, North Paravur, Ernakulam are quashed.

¶35

This Crl.M.C is allowed.

¶36

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

jm/

¶39

CRL.MC NO. 37 OF 2020

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 37/2020

¶42

`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`
`Annexure A3`	`THE ORIGINAL OF THE COMPOUNDING PETITION` `DATED 03.01.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT`
`ANNEXURE A2`	`THE TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT` `IN CRIME NO.555/2018 OF VARAPUZHA POLICE` `STATION IN ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PENDING AS` `C.C.NO.17/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL` `FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III, NORTH` `PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM.`
`RESPONDENT ANNEXURES`
`ANNEXURE R3(a):`	`TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED` `25/10/2013 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE` `SARFAESI ACT.`
`ANNEXURE R3(b):`	`TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION NOTICE DATED` `30/12/2014 ISSUED BY THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER` `OF THE BANK UNDER SECTION 13(E) OF THE` `SARFAESI ACT.`
`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`
`ANNEXURE A1`	`THE TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, FIR` `AND FIS IN CRIME NO.555/2018 OF VARAPUZHA` `POLICE STATION IN ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.`
`RESPONDENT ANNEXURES`
`ANNEXURE R3(d):`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 05/05/2017` `FILED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN` `CMP.NO.1385 OF 2015 BEFORE COURT OF THE CHIEF` `JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM.`
`ANNEXURE R3(e):`	`TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 05/05/2017` `SUBMITTED BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER OF THE BANK` `BEFORE THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER OF VARAPUZHA` `POLICE STATION.`
`ANNEXURE R3(c):`	`TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17/03/2017 IN` `CMP.NO.1385/15 ISSUED BY THE COURT OF CHIEF` `JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM.`

Baiju John, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baiju John, 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

Joy Iype Vs State of Kerala

Shiju Velappan Vs Excise Range Inspector Muvattupuzha

Domanic Vs State of Kerala

Abraham Mathai Vs State of Kerala

Ronaldo Cleetus Vs Stateof Kerala

Sajeer T Vs State of Kerala