Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sathi Devi, vs State of Kerala,

Sathi Devi, vs State of Kerala,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 06, 2025
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1277372

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.MC/936/2025
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sathi Devi,

Respondent

State of Kerala,

Excerpt

.....and collected rs.5,30,003.32/-, thereby causing financial loss to the company.3. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted thatthe 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.4. learned counsel for the 2nd respondent also submitted that the dispute is settled and his client has no grievance against the petitioner.5. i heard the learned public prosecutor also.6. having considered the gravity of the offencesalleged 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.2094 of 2016 of viyyur police station and all further proceedings in c.c.no.861 of 2017 on the files of the judicial first class magistrate court-i, thrissur, as against the petitioner, is quashed.sd/- v.g.arun judge spv appendix of crl.mc 936/2025 petitioner’s annexures annexure a1 certified copy of the first information report in crime no. 2094 of 2016 of viyyur police station dated 30.09.2016 annexure a2 certified copy of the charge dated 22.12.2016 before the judicial first class magistrate court,no.1, thrissur annexure a3 the affidavit executed by the defacto complainant respondent’s annexures: nil //true copy// pa to judge

Full Judgment

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 CRIME NO.2094/2016 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.861 OF 2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,THRISSUR PETITIONER: SATHI DEVI, AGED 52 YEARS W/O. KEERIYATTIL SASIDHARAN, THRISSUR TALUK, KURUCHIKKARA VILLAGE, KURICHIKKARA AKKARAPPURAM DESOM, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT C/O SAROJINI AMMA PULIYATH HOUSE, KURICHIKKARA PONGANAMKAD.P.O, THRISSUR, PIN - 680028 BY ADV V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 MATTAMPURAM KSHERA UDPADAKA SAHAKARANA SANGAM, R46D, THRISSUR TALUK, KURICHIKKARA VILLAGE, MATTAMPURAM DESOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT RAVI, S/O.VELAPPAN, AGED 59 YEARS, PAYYAPPAT HOUSE, THANIKKUDAM, DHIRDHANI DESOM, MADAKKATHARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR THALUK, PIN - 680651 BY ADVS C.K.SREEJITH 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:

ORDER

Dated this the 06th day of March, 2025 The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.2094 of 2016 registered at the Viyyur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 408, 420, 465 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, now pending as C.C.No.861 of 2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur.

2. The crime was registered on the allegation that the accused, while working as the secretary of the 2nd respondent society, forged documents and collected Rs.5,30,003.32/-, thereby causing financial loss to the company.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the 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.

4. Learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent also submitted that the dispute is settled and his client has no grievance against the petitioner.

5. I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

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.2094 of 2016 of Viyyur Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.861 of 2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur, as against the petitioner, is quashed.

Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE SPV APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 936/2025 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 2094 OF 2016 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION DATED 30.09.2016 ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE DATED 22.12.2016 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,NO.1, THRISSUR ANNEXURE A3 THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial