Padmanabhan Vs. State of Kerala

Padmanabhan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 24, 2014

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1166569

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1166569
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.Ubaid
Decided On: Oct 24, 2014
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Padmanabhan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....court, payyannur. crime in the said case was registered on the complaint of one kannan velichappadan that his own sons assaulted him, and inflicted injuries on his body. crime was registered under sections 341, 323, 427, 506(i) and 324 ipc. the defacto complainant kannan velichappadan is no more. his legal heir other than the accused is his wife lakshmi, who is the second respondent in this proceeding. the accused now seek orders under section 482 cr.p.c quashing the prosecution on the ground that they and their mother have settled the dispute out of court after the death of the father, and that the mother has no grievance or complaint.2. the petitioners are the three sons of the defacto complainant, who is no more. it appears that the alleged incident happened in connection with some property dispute within the family. pending the proceedings, the parties filed crl.m.a no. 9123/14 to record composition. the offence under section 324 ipc crl. m.c no. 5233 of 2014 2 is not compoundable under the law. so the said application can be closed. however orders can be passed under section 482 cr.p.c. the wife of the deceased defacto complainant has filed affidavit that she has settled the dispute with her sons, and that she has no grievance or complaint. affidavit filed by the second respondent as the legal heir of deceased defacto complainant is accepted. i find that the parties have really settled the whole dispute, and that continuance of prosecution will do hardship and injustice to both sides in the present circumstances. continuance of prosecution will not in fact serve any purpose, other than wasting the precious time of the court. in the result, this petition is allowed. the prosecution as against the petitioners in cc no.643/2013 of the judicial first class magistrate court, payyannur will stand quashed under section 482 cr.p.c, and the petitioners will stand released from prosecution. the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged. p.ubaid, judge.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID FRIDAY, THE24H DAY OF OCTOBER20142ND KARTHIKA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 5233 of 2014 () --------------------------- IN CC6432013 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PAYYANNUR CRIME NO. 374/2013 OF PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION , KANNUR PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. PADMANABHAN K. AGED33YEARS S/O.KANNAN VELICHAPPADAN, KANDAMKOLE HOUSE, THENNAM PANAPUZHA AMSOM, ERYAM P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670 306 2. GANGADHARAN K. AGED42YEARS S/O.KANNAN VELICHAPPADAN, KANDAMKOLE HOUSE, THENNAM PANAPUZHA AMSOM, ERYAM P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670 306.

3. RAJAN K. AGED37YEARS S/O.KANNAN VELICHAPPADAN, KANDAMKOLE HOUSE, THENNAM PANAPUZHA AMSOM, ERYAM P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670 306. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENT(S)/STATE AND LR OF DECEASED COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA (SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION CRIME NO.374/2013) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2. KANDAMKOLE LAKSHMI, AGED62YEARS W/O.KANNAN VELICHAPPADAN, KANDAMKOLE HOUSE THENNAM PANAPUZHA AMSOM, ERYAM P.O KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670306 R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J PANICKER R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P.MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2410- 2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No. 5233 of 2014 () --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNX.A1 - THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR & F.I.STATEMENT IN CRIME NO.374/2013 OF PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION ANNX.A2 - TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME NO.374/2013 OF PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION ANNX.A3 - TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED0601-2014 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTH AND DEATHS, KADANNAPPALLY - PANAPPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT ANNX.A4 - THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE2D RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PATO JUDGE sab P.UBAID, J.

----------------------------- Crl. M.C No. 5233 of 2014 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2014. ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in C.C No.643/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate court, Payyannur. Crime in the said case was registered on the complaint of one Kannan Velichappadan that his own sons assaulted him, and inflicted injuries on his body. Crime was registered under Sections 341, 323, 427, 506(i) and 324 IPC. The defacto complainant Kannan Velichappadan is no more. His legal heir other than the accused is his wife Lakshmi, who is the second respondent in this proceeding. The accused now seek orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C quashing the prosecution on the ground that they and their mother have settled the dispute out of court after the death of the father, and that the mother has no grievance or complaint.

2. The petitioners are the three sons of the defacto complainant, who is no more. It appears that the alleged incident happened in connection with some property dispute within the family. Pending the proceedings, the parties filed Crl.M.A No. 9123/14 to record composition. The offence under Section 324 IPC Crl. M.C No. 5233 of 2014 2 is not compoundable under the law. So the said application can be closed. However orders can be passed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The wife of the deceased defacto complainant has filed affidavit that she has settled the dispute with her sons, and that she has no grievance or complaint. Affidavit filed by the second respondent as the legal heir of deceased defacto complainant is accepted. I find that the parties have really settled the whole dispute, and that continuance of prosecution will do hardship and injustice to both sides in the present circumstances. Continuance of prosecution will not in fact serve any purpose, other than wasting the precious time of the court. In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution as against the petitioners in CC No.643/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, and the petitioners will stand released from prosecution. The bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged. P.UBAID, JUDGE sab

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2014 Same Parties Padmanabhan vs State of Kerala Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.Ubaid