Accused sought quashing of proceedings in a hurt and criminal intimidation case after amicable settlement with the de facto complainant, evidenced by affidavit. Court found no public interest involved and no possibility of conviction, and quashed the final report and further proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2025:KER:20102
CRL.MC NO. 886 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 886 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1246/2023 OF UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.496 OF 2023 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIPUNITHURA
PETITIONER:
MAHESH KUMAR,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O SURESH KUMAR,
KADALAYIKULANGARA HOUSE,
MARITHAZHAM P.O.,
KANJIRAMATTAM,
AMBALLUR ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682315
BY ADVS.
K.R.PRATHISH
P.K.SREEVALSAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2VISHNU P V,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O P P VENUGOPALAN,KRISHNA HOUSE,
2025:KER:20102
CRL.MC NO. 886 OF 2025
2
AMBALLUR P.O.,AMBALLUR,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682315
BY ADVS
JACOB E SIMON
SMT. PUSHPALATHA. M.K, SR.PP.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
3
2025:KER:20102
CRL.MC NO. 886 OF 2025
ORDER
Dated this the 06th day of March, 2025
Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1246 of 2023
registered at the Udayemperoor Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 324, 326, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, now pending as C.C.No.496 of 2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thripunithura.
30.08.2023, at about 05:30 PM, the accused, due to prior animosity, threatened, restrained, verbally abused, and assaulted the de facto complainant, thereby causing injuries
dispute, which led to the incident and registration of the crime, is amicably settled and Annexure A3 affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent vouching this fact.
2025:KER:20102
CRL.MC NO. 886 OF 2025
4 6. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged and having perused the affidavit, the contents of which are vouched to be true and voluntary by the Counsel for the 2nd respondent, I am satisfied that no public interest is involved in this matter and the dispute has been settled amicably. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure A2 final report in Crime No.1246 of 2023 of Udayemperoor Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.496 of 2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thripunithura, as against the petitioner, is quashed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN, JUDGE
SPV
CRL.MC NO. 886 OF 2025
5
2025:KER:20102
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 886/2025
PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
1246 OF 2023 OF UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM, DATED 31.08.2023
ANNEXURE A2CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC
NO. 496 OF 2023 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, THRIPPUNITHURA IN CRIME
NO. 1246 OF 2023 OF UDAYAMPEROOR POLICE
STATION
ANNEXURE A3ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 17.01.2025
RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 324, 326 and 506 IPC should be quashed on the basis of an amicable settlement between the accused and the de facto complainant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Mohan Abbot v State of PunjabRelied on¶6
(2008) 4 SCC 582 · Who else cites this
Gian Singh v State of Punjab and AnotherRelied on¶6
(2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mahesh Kumar
State of Kerala
Vishnu P V
V.G.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court