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.

Ajith Mr vs State of Kerala

Ajith Mr vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 03, 2023
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1401288

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/8386/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ajith Mr

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....village, pathanamthitta district , pin - 689501 by advs. p.t.sheejish parvathy s. krishnan p.sreeram harikiran g.ramanathan muhammed safeer a. sandra tom ganga a.sankar christabel d avravu aparna v.s. majeed v.y. athul babu respondent/state and defacto complainant: 1 state of kerala represented public procecutor, high court of kerala, kochin, pin - 682031 2 sasidhara kurup aged 56 years, s/o kadaykkad pulimoodiyil narayana kurup, vilayil veetil house, poozhikkadu muri, chiramudi, pandalam, pathanamthitta district,, pin - 689501 by advs. public prosecutor ajoy venu adv m p prashanth- pp this criminal misc. case having come up for admission on 03.01.2023, the court on the same day passed the following:orderthe petitioners are the accused nos.1 and 2 in crime no.1738/2014 of pandalam police station which is now pending as c.c 708/2016 before the judicial first class magistrate court, adoor. the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under sections 341, 294(b), 324 read with section 34 of indian penal code. annexure-a1 is the fir and annexure-a2 is the final report submitted by the police. the 2 nd respondent is the defacto complainant. this crl.mc is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to annexure-a2.2. heard sri. p.t sheejish, the learned counsel appearingfor the petitioners, sri. m.p.prashanth, the learned public prosecutor appearing for the state and sri. ajoy venu, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.3. the prayer for quashing the above proceedings issought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the defacto complainant has sworn annexure-a3 affidavit. the aforesaid affidavit indicates that, the matter has been settled and the defacto complainant has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. he also conveyed that he has no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. the learned counsel for.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 13TH POUSHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 8386 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 708/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , ADOOR PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO 1 AND 2: 1 AJITH MR AGED 30 YEARS S/O RAMACHANDRAN, MALAMUKALLIL VEEDU, KUDASSANAD P.O, EZHIKKADU MURIYIL, PANDALAM VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT . , PIN - 689501 2 VISHNU, AGED 31 YEARS S/O KUNJUKRISHNAN, VALYAYATHU VEEDU, KUDASSANAD P.O, POOZHIKKADU MURIYIL, PANDALAM VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT , PIN - 689501 BY ADVS. P.T.SHEEJISH PARVATHY S. KRISHNAN P.SREERAM HARIKIRAN G.RAMANATHAN MUHAMMED SAFEER A. SANDRA TOM GANGA A.SANKAR CHRISTABEL D AVRAVU APARNA V.S. MAJEED V.Y. ATHUL BABU RESPONDENT/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED PUBLIC PROCECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHIN, PIN - 682031 2 SASIDHARA KURUP AGED 56 YEARS, S/O KADAYKKAD PULIMOODIYIL NARAYANA KURUP, VILAYIL VEETIL HOUSE, POOZHIKKADU MURI, CHIRAMUDI, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,, PIN - 689501 BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AJOY VENU ADV M P PRASHANTH- PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.1738/2014 of Pandalam Police Station which is now pending as C.C 708/2016 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 324 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-A1 is the FIR and Annexure-A2 is the Final Report submitted by the Police. The 2 nd respondent is the defacto complainant. This Crl.MC is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2.

2. Heard Sri. P.T Sheejish, the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners, Sri. M.P.Prashanth, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri. Ajoy Venu, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

3. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is

sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the defacto complainant has sworn Annexure-A3 affidavit. The aforesaid affidavit indicates that, the matter has been settled and the defacto complainant has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. He also conveyed that he has no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant person also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the defacto complainant has reiterated that, he does not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein.

4. Going through the materials available on record, it is

discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioners herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view that going by the decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108], this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.1738/2014 of Pandalam Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.708/2016 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor as against the petitioners are hereby quashed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE rpk APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8386/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO: PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN IN CRIME NO: 1738/2014 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT Annexure A3 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/10/2022

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial