Allowed

Ajith Chandran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Feb 2024Crl.MC/631/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by an accused to quash proceedings for cheating and criminal breach of trust. The High Court quashed the proceedings after finding the matter settled and noting that continuing them would serve no purpose.

What did the court decide?

All criminal proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No. 0796/2023 of Ponkunnam Police Station are quashed.

Ajith Chandran Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA,

¶4

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 631 OF 2024

¶6

CRIME NO.0796/2023 OF PONKUNNAM POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

¶8

AJITH CHANDRAN
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O C.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
KOOTTIYANIYIL (H), MALLIKASSERY P.O,
MALLIKASSERY PAIKA, PALA, KOTTAYAM – 686 577.
BY ADV ASHISH ANTONY FRANCIS

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

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

¶11

2HARIKRISHNAN
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O T.K MOHANAN PILLAI
THEKKUMPURATHU HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMBHAGAM KARA,
CHIRAKKADAVU EAST P.O, KATHALANKALPPADI
BHAGAM, CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM, PIN –
686 520

¶12

BY ADVS.
MAITREYI SACHCHIDANANDA HEGDE HEGDE
ANJALI ANIL A.(K/859/2021)
SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP)

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶14

CRL.MC NO. 631 OF 2024

¶15

¶16

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J

¶17

......….............................................

¶18

Crl.M.C.No.631 of 2024

¶19

…................................................

¶20

Dated this the 15^th day of February, 2024

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C

¶23

to quash all proceedings against him.

¶24

Petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.796/2023 of

¶25

Ponkunnam Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The second respondent is the de facto complainant.

¶26

According to the prosecution, the accused while working as a collection agent under the de facto complainant, collected an amount of Rs. 3,40,000/- from its members, and failed to return

¶27

or account for the same, 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

¶30

¶31

CRL.MC NO. 631 OF 2024

¶32

has been settled and hence the proceedings against the

¶33

petitioner ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that,

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and

¶37

Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

¶38

I have perused affidavit filed by the 2^nd respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the de facto 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

¶39

CRL.MC NO. 631 OF 2024

¶40

¶41

exercise in futility.

¶42

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner in Crime

¶43

No.796/2023 of Ponkunnam Police Station, are quashed.

¶44

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.

¶45

sd/BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AMV/16/02/2024

¶46

CRL.MC NO. 631 OF 2024

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 631/2024

¶49

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶50

ANNEXURE IA COPY OF THE FIR DATED 07.07.2023 WITH
CRIME NO. 0796/2023 IN PONKUNNAM POLICE
STATION, KOTTAYAM.
ANNEXURE IIA COPY OF THE CASH DEPOSIT SLIP DATED
27.12.2023 SHOWING THE DEPOSIT OF THE
AMOUNT MADE BY THE PETITIONER IN THE
COMPANY ACCOUNT.
ANNEXURE IIIAFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶51

TRUE COPY

Ajith Chandran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajith Chandran 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

Rosy Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Sarath Vs State of Kerala

Dilshad Ali Vs State of Kerala

Rameez K.T. Vs State of Kerala

Althaf Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Gafoor Vs State of Kerala