Raju vs State of Kerala

RAJU vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Sep 30, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1373232

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/1373232
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P.
Decided On: Sep 30, 2023
Case Number: Crl.MC/5449/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

RAJU

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....magistrate of first class ,irinjalakuda petitioner/accused: raju aged 43 years, s/o sivanandhan, palakkavali house, mayithara desom, kanchikuzhi village, cherthala taluk, alapuzha district, pin - 688 539. rajesh chakyat respondents/state, defacto complainant & i.o:1 state of kerala represented by public prosecutor, high court of kerala, pin - 682 031. 2 nithya aged 38 years, d/o karunakaran, vazhaparambil house , kallayimoola village, p.o. varandarapilly, chalakudy taluk, 3 the station house officer varandarapilly police station, varandarappilly, sri.biju .c. abraham (for r2) noushad ka- senior public prosecutor this criminal misc. case having come up for admission on30.09.2023, the court on the same day passed the following: :2:orderdated this the 30th day of september, 2023 petitioner is accused in crime no.49/2023 of varandarapilly police station, thrissur district, which is now pending as c.c. no.580/2023 on the file of the judicial first class magistrate court, irinjalakuda, alleging commission of offences punishable under sections 323, 324 and 498a of the indian penal code.2. learned counsel appearing for the petitionerwould submit that the entire issues between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent (the de facto complainant) have been settled. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also refers to annexure 2 affidavit executed by the 2 nd respondent to establish that the entire issues between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent have been settled and the 2 nd respondent does not intend to continue with the proceedings against the petitioner.3. learned senior public prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent affirms that the :3:entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent have been settled and that the 2nd respondent does not wish to continue with the proceedings against the petitioner.4. having heard the learned counsel appearing forthe petitioner, learned senior public prosecutor and the learned.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. SATURDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 8TH ASWINA, CRL.MC NO. 5449 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 580/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,IRINJALAKUDA PETITIONER/ACCUSED: RAJU AGED 43 YEARS, S/O SIVANANDHAN, PALAKKAVALI HOUSE, MAYITHARA DESOM, KANCHIKUZHI VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 539. RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENTS/STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & I.O:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031. 2 NITHYA AGED 38 YEARS, D/O KARUNAKARAN, VAZHAPARAMBIL HOUSE , KALLAYIMOOLA VILLAGE, P.O. VARANDARAPILLY, CHALAKUDY TALUK, 3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER VARANDARAPILLY POLICE STATION, VARANDARAPPILLY, SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM (FOR R2) NOUSHAD KA- SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: :2:

ORDER

Dated this the 30th day of September, 2023 Petitioner is accused in Crime No.49/2023 of Varandarapilly Police Station, Thrissur District, which is now pending as C.C. No.580/2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would submit that the entire issues between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent (the de facto complainant) have been settled. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also refers to Annexure 2 affidavit executed by the 2 nd respondent to establish that the entire issues between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent have been settled and the 2 nd respondent does not intend to continue with the proceedings against the petitioner.

3. Learned Senior Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent affirms that the :3:

entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent have been settled and that the 2nd respondent does not wish to continue with the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner, learned Senior Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, I am of the view that this Crl.M.C. can be allowed on the ground of settlement. There is no public interest involved in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner. Therefore, in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, further proceedings against the petitioner can be quashed on the ground of settlement.

Accordingly, the Crl.M.C is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C No.580/2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda (Crime No.49/2023 of Varandarapilly Police Station) will stand quashed as against the petitioner. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMR :4: APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5449/2023 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.49/2023 OF IRINJALAKUDA POLICE DATED 26.03.2023. Annexure 2 ORIGINAL COPY OF THE COMPOUNDING AFFIDAVIT DATED 05.07.2023 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties RAJU vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P.