Yahiya, vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 01, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1401401

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/1401401
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Dec 01, 2023
Case Number: Crl.MC/8980/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Yahiya,

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....station, kannur district now pending as cc no.584/2019 on the file of the chief judicial magistrate court, thalasserry on the ground of settlement between the parties.2. the petitioners are the accused nos.1 to 5. the 2 nd respondent is the de facto complainant.3. the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 323, 448 and 506 of ipc.4. an affidavit sworn in by the 2 nd respondent is also produced.5. i have heard adv.raihanath t.h., the learned counsel for the petitioners and adv.noushad k.a., the learned public prosecutor.6. the averments in the petition as well as the affidavit -:4:-sworn in by the 2nd respondent would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings further. the learned prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was amicably settled.7. the apex court in gian singh v. state of punjab [2012(4) klt 108 (sc)], narinder singh and others v. state of punjaband others [(2014) 6 scc 466] and in state of madhya pradesh v. laxmi narayan and others [(2019) 5 scc 688] has held that the high court by invoking s.482 of cr.p.c can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under s.320 of cr.p.c. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any court.8. the dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. no public interest or harmony will be adversely affected -:5:-by quashing the proceedings pursuant to annexure a2. the offences in question do not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 8980 OF 2023 CRIME NO.215/2019 OF Kolavallur Police Station, Kannur AGAINST CC 584/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS THALASSERY PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 5:

1 YAHIYA, AGED 34 YEARS S/O MAHAMOOD, KUTHIRAN MAKOOL, ERININ KEZHIL, TRIPANGOTTOR KADVATHOOR, KULAVALLUR , KANNUR,PIN - 670676 2 SUBAIR, AGED 32 YEARS S/O. KUNNADDHULLA, THEKKEYIL HOUSE,TRIPANGOTTOR AMSOM ERININ KEZHIL, KADVATHOOR, KULAVALLUR KANNUR,, PIN - 670676 3 ASLAM,AGED 41 YEARS S/O. KUNNAHAMMAD, KARUPPANTE VEED, TRIPANGOTTOR AMSOM, ERININ KEZHIL, KADVATHOOR, KULAVALLUR KANNUR,, PIN - 670676 4 SAYIDH,AGED 30 YEARS S/O KUJABDHULLA, GULFAR NAALU KANDIYIL HOUSE, KADVATHOOR, KULAVALLUR ,KANNUR,, PIN - 670676 5 RASHID,AGED 27 YEARS S/O ABOOBAKKAR, KANNOLIL HOUSE,TRIPANGOTTOR AMSOM ERININ KEZHIL, KADVATHOOR, KULAVALLUR ,KANNUR, PIN - 670676 BY ADV RAIHANATH T.H. -:2:-

RESPONDENTS/STATE-DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 PANKAJAKSHI.BV, AGED 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT BAVOTTUKUNIYIL HOUSE, TRIPRANGOTOR AMSOM, KADAVATHOOR DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670676 OTHER PRESENT: SRI.NOUSHAD K.A., PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:3:-

O R D E R

Dated this the 1st day of December, 2023 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.215/2019 of Kulavallur Police Station, Kannur District now pending as CC No.584/2019 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalasserry on the ground of settlement between the parties.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 5. The 2 nd respondent is the de facto complainant.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 323, 448 and 506 of IPC.

4. An affidavit sworn in by the 2 nd respondent is also produced.

5. I have heard Adv.Raihanath T.H., the learned counsel for the petitioners and Adv.Noushad K.A., the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit -:4:-

sworn in by the 2nd respondent would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was amicably settled.

7. The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012

(4) KLT 108 (SC)], Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab

and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.

8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected -:5:-

by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2. The offences in question do not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra). For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.215/2019 of Kulavallur Police Station, Kannur District now pending as CC No.584/2019 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalasserry hereby stands quashed.

Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE Rp -:6:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8980/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 22/4/2019 IN CRIME NUMBER 215/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE KULAVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT Annexure A2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 3/7/2019 IN C.C NO.584 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERRY Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 16.08.2023 OF THE 2 ND RESPONDENT

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Yahiya, vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath

First information report Criminal proceeding Public prosecutor Abuse of process magistrate court public interest