Amjad Khan vs the State of Kerala

Amjad Khan vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 22, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1385201

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/1385201
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Jun 22, 2023
Case Number: Crl.Rev.Pet/667/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Amjad Khan

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....sections 406 and 420 r/w 34 of the ipc. the learned magistrate after full-fledged trial found the revision petitioner guilty under section 406 of the ipc. he was convicted for the said offence. he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of rs.5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months.3. the appeal preferred by the revision petitioner wasdismissed by the sessions court. challenging the judgment of the learned magistrate as well as the sessions court, this criminal revision petition has been preferred. ..3..4. the respondent no.2 has been arrayed as the defactocomplainant. now, the matter has been settled between the parties. the offence involved is compoundable in nature with the permission of the court. a compounding petition has been filed by the revision petitioner as well as the respondent no.2. it is stated in that compounding petition that the entire matter has been settled between the parties and the respondent no.2 does not want to proceed with the case further.5. the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 as wellas the counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the entire matter has been settled between the parties. i am satisfied that the composition is voluntary. hence, the offence stands compounded and the composition shall have the effect of the acquittal of the accused no.1/revision petitioner under section 320(8) of cr.p.c.the criminal revision petition stands disposed of in terms of the composition. accordingly, the impugned judgments of conviction and sentence are set aside. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge apa

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1945 CRL.REV.PET NO. 667 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.855/2004 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,MANJERI CRL.A. NO.140/2006 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, MANJERI REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ ACCUSED NO.1: AMJAD KHAN AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMEDALI, MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, NECHIKUND, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV K.RAKESH RESPONDENTS/ STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031 3 SAMEER P AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMMED, PADAVANNA HOUSE, MANJERI-1 P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 121 BY ADV K.S.PRAVEEN SRI C.N PRABHAKARAN SR PP, THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

ORDER

Dated this the 22nd day of June 2023 This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed challenging the judgment of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Manjeri in C.C.No.855/2004 dated 03/03/2006 and the

judgment of Sessions Court, Manjeri in Crl.A.No.140/2006

dated 19/01/2010.

2. The revision petitioner was the accused No.1 in

C.C.No.855/2004. The offences alleged against him were under Sections 406 and 420 r/w 34 of the IPC. The learned Magistrate after full-fledged trial found the revision petitioner guilty under Section 406 of the IPC. He was convicted for the said offence. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months.

3. The appeal preferred by the revision petitioner was

dismissed by the Sessions Court. Challenging the judgment of the learned Magistrate as well as the Sessions Court, this criminal revision petition has been preferred. ..3..

4. The respondent No.2 has been arrayed as the defacto

complainant. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties. The offence involved is compoundable in nature with the permission of the Court. A compounding petition has been filed by the revision petitioner as well as the respondent No.2. It is stated in that compounding petition that the entire matter has been settled between the parties and the respondent No.2 does not want to proceed with the case further.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 as well

as the counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the entire matter has been settled between the parties. I am satisfied that the composition is voluntary. Hence, the offence stands compounded and the composition shall have the effect of the acquittal of the accused No.1/revision petitioner under Section 320(8) of Cr.P.C.

The criminal revision petition stands disposed of in terms of the composition. Accordingly, the impugned judgments of conviction and sentence are set aside. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE APA

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Amjad Khan vs The State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath