Shebin vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 31, 2024

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1328815

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/1328815
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas
Decided On: Jul 31, 2024
Case Number: Crl.MC/6025/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shebin

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....class magistrate court-ii, kollam, arising out of crime no.625/2012 of kottiyam police station, registered for the offences under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 r/w section 149 of the indian penal code, 1860. respondents 2 to 5 are the defacto complainant and the injured witnesses.3. according to the prosecution, the accused had, on 03.04.2012, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and attacked the defacto complainant and others, and thereby committed the offences alleged.4. heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from the learned public prosecutor.5. the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matterhas been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. it was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings. -:5:-6. in gian singh v. state of punjab and another [(2012) 10 scc303], 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 to annexure-a6 affidavits filed byrespondents 2 to 5. the learned public prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto complainant and the other deponents stand 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 petitioners inc.c.no.628/2012 on the files of the judicial first.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2024 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 6025 OF 2024 CRIME NO.625/2012 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM IN CC NO.628 OF 2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOLLAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 5: 1 SHEBIN AGED 32 YEARS S/O SHERAFUDHEEN, SHANID MANZIL, PATTARUMUKKU, 2 MUHAMMED SALIH S/O SALAHUDHEEN, CHARUVILA THODIYIL VEEDU, 3 NIYAS AGED 31 YEARS S/O ABDHUL RAZAQ, RIYAS MANZIL, PATTARUMUKKU, THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE, 4 RAFEEQ AGED 31 YEARS S/O LATHEEF, VAYALIL PUTHEN VEEDU, -:2:- NADUVILAKKARA CHERI,MAYYANADU VILLAGE, 5 RAJESH AGED 33 YEARS S/O HARIDASAN, VISHNU VILASOM VEEDU, NADUVILAKKARA CHERI,MAYYANADU VILLAGE, BY ADV SREERAJ M.D. RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERANAKULAM, PIN - 682031

2 MUHAMMED SABIR AGED 32 YEARS S/O MUHAMMED SALIM, SABIR MANZIL, PT NAGAR, CHAKARIKADA,KAYYALAYKKAL CHERI, IRAVIPURAM VILLAGE, 3 FIROZ S/O NASAR, NO 166, SWARGADHARA NAGAR, MUPPLASSERI, NEAR NIRMALA HOSPITAL, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE,

4 NOUFAL S/O MAHIN SETT, VELIYIL VEEDU, NO 207,CHAKIRIKKADA, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, -:3:- 5 ABDHUL AZEES AGED 59 YEARS S/O SULAIMAN KUNJU, S&S MANZIL, NEAR UMAYNELLOR TEMPLE, BY ADV AJMAL P. OTHER PRESENT: SRI. NOUSHAD K. A, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:4:-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

--------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of July, 2024

ORDER

Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 5 in C.C.No.628/2012 on the

files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam, arising out of Crime No.625/2012 of Kottiyam Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 2 to 5 are the defacto complainant and the injured witnesses.

3. According to the prosecution, the accused had, on 03.04.2012, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and attacked the defacto complainant and others, and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter

has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings. -:5:-

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 to Annexure-A6 affidavits filed by

respondents 2 to 5. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto complainant and the other deponents stand 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 petitioners in

C.C.No.628/2012 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam, are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Jka/31.07.24. -:6:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6025/2024 PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R AND FIS IN CRIME NO. 625/2012 REGISTERED BY THE KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION DATED 4/4/2012 Annexure A2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JFMC-II, KOLLAM DATED 25/5/2012 Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.2/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 2/6/2024 Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.3/INJURED DATED 2/6/2024 Annexure A5 THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.4/INJURED DATED 2/6/2024 Annexure A6 THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.5/INJURED DATED 2/6/2024

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Shebin vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas