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.

Anil Napolean vs State of Kerala

Anil Napolean vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 27, 2024
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1286976

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/572/2024
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anil Napolean

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....of crime no.2436 of 2021 of kothamangalam police station registered for the offences under sections 406 and 415 r/w section 420 of the indian penal code, 1860 apart from section 24 r/w section 10 of emigration act, 1983. second respondent is the defacto complainant.3. according to the prosecution, the accused hadcommitted criminal breach of trust and cheating by promising to provide an employment visa to the petitioner at greece and thereby collecting a large amount of money, and thereafter failing to provide the visa or return the amount, and thereby committed the offences alleged.4. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned public prosecutor.5. the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted thatthe 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.6. 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 and others v. state of punjab and another [(2014) 6 scc 466] and yogendra yadav and others v. state of jharkhand and another [(2014) 9 scc 653].7. i have perused annexure a3 affidavit filed by the 2 ndrespondent. the learned public prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the defacto 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 exercise in futility.8. accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner inc.c......

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 8TH PHALGUNA, 1945 CRIME NO.2436/2021 OF Kothamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 195/2022 OF JUDICIAL FIRST MAGISTRATE COURT, KOTHAMANGALAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ANIL NAPOLEAN AGED 35 YEARS PUTHUVALPURAYIDAM HOUSE,MENAMKULAMKARA, MENAMKULAM VILLAGE, NEAR KINFRA, KAZHAKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695582 BY ADV NEETHU S. RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 JINTO PAUL AGED 34 YEARS S/O PAUL, THUDUMEL HOUSE, PINDIMANA P.O., PINDIMANA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 3 STATION HOUSE OFFICE KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686691 BY ADV Bharat Vijay P OTHER PRESENT: SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

----------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 572 of 2024 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of February, 2024

ORDER

Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash all proceedings against him.

2. Petitioner is the accused in C.C. No.195 of 2022 on the

files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kothamangalam arising out of Crime No.2436 of 2021 of Kothamangalam Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 415 r/w Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Section 24 r/w Section 10 of Emigration Act, 1983. Second respondent is the defacto complainant.

3. According to the prosecution, the accused had

committed criminal breach of trust and cheating by promising to provide an employment visa to the petitioner at Greece and thereby collecting a large amount of money, and thereafter failing to provide the visa or return the amount, and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. 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.

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

7. I have perused Annexure A3 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 defacto 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 exercise in futility.

8. Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner in

C.C. No.195 of 2022 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kothamangalam are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AJM APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 572/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 01/10/2021 IN CRIME NO. 2436/2021OF KOTHAMANGALAMPOLICE STATIONNOW PENDING AS C.C NO 195/2022 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1, KOTHAMANGALAM Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 31/10/2021 IN CRIME NO.2436/2021OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION NOW PENDING AS C.C NO CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1, KOTHAMANGALAM Annexure A3 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES TRUE COPY

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial