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.

Rajeev vs State of Kerala

Rajeev vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 22, 2023
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1410294

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/10459/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajeev

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....come up for admission on 22.12.2023, the court on the same day passed the following: crl.m.c. no.10459 of 2023 2orderpetitioner is the accused in crime no.1333/2021 of punalur police station, kollam district, alleging commission of offences under sections 452, 323, 324 & 308 of the indian penal code. the matter is now pending as c.p.no.11/2022 before the judicial magistrate of the first class-ii (forest offences), punalur.2. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner wouldsubmit that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have been settled. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also refers to annexure-3 and annexure-4 affidavits executed by respondents 2 and 3 respectively to establish that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have been settled and respondents 2 and 3 do not intend to continue with the proceedings against the petitioner.3. the learned senior public prosecutor and thelearned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 would confirm that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have been settled and respondents 2 crl.m.c. no.10459 of 2023 3 and 3 do not wish to continue with the prosecution in any manner.4. having heard the learned counsel for thepetitioner, the learned senior public prosecutor and the learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3, i am of the view that the proceedings against the petitioner can be terminated in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this court under section 482 of cr.p.c. no public interest will be served by continuing with the proceedings against the petitioner. the nature of the offences does not compel me to hold that the proceedings cannot be quashed on the ground of settlement. keeping the principles laid down by the supreme court in gian singh v. state of punjab and another; (2012) 10 scc 303, and state of madhya pradesh v. laxmi narayan and others;(2019) 5 scc 688, i am of the view that considering thenature of the offences.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 1ST POUSHA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 10459 OF 2023 CRIME NO.1333/2021 OF PUNALUR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM CP 11/2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II(FOREST OFFENCES),PUNALUR PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED: RAJEEV AGED 35 YEARS, S/O RAJAN, ASWATHY BHAVAN, AGASTHYACODU, ANCHAL VILLAGE, AGASTHYACODU P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 306. BY ADVS. NIRMAL V NAIR ANEES.T ARATHI PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS/STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND INJURED:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031. 2 ARUN MOHAN AGED 37 YEARS, S/O MOHANAN, RESIDING AT VAYALIRAKKATHU VEEDU, NEAR KARAVALOOR PEEDIKA TEMBLE, KARAVALOOR P.O, PUNALUR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 691 333. 3 PRASANNA AGED 62 YEARS, W/O MOHANAN, RESIDING AT VAYALIRAKKATHU VEEDU, NEAR KARAVALOOR PEEDIKA TEMBLE, KARAVALOOR P.O, PUNALUR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 691 333. BY ADVS. NOUSHAD K.A. (SR PP) ENCIL K. SABU (FOR R2 AND R3)

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C. NO.10459 OF 2023 2

ORDER

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1333/2021 of Punalur Police Station, Kollam District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 452, 323, 324 & 308 of the Indian Penal Code. The matter is now pending as C.P.No.11/2022 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II (Forest Offences), Punalur.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have been settled. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also refers to Annexure-3 and Annexure-4 affidavits executed by respondents 2 and 3 respectively to establish that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have been settled and respondents 2 and 3 do not intend to continue with the proceedings against the petitioner.

3. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor and the

learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 would confirm that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have been settled and respondents 2 Crl.M.C. NO.10459 OF 2023 3 and 3 do not wish to continue with the prosecution in any manner.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3, I am of the view that the proceedings against the petitioner can be terminated in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. No public interest will be served by continuing with the proceedings against the petitioner. The nature of the offences does not compel me to hold that the proceedings cannot be quashed on the ground of settlement. Keeping the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another; (2012) 10 SCC 303, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others;

(2019) 5 SCC 688, I am of the view that considering the

nature of the offences alleged against the petitioner the proceedings can be quashed on the basis of settlement. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.P.No.11/2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II (Forest Offences), Punalur Crl.M.C. NO.10459 OF 2023 4 (arising out of Crime No.1333/2021 of Punalur Police Station, Kollam District), will stand quashed as against the petitioner. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE

ats Crl.M.C. NO.10459 OF 2023 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10459/2023 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 17-10-2021 IN CRIME NO. 1333/2021 OF THE PUNALUR POLICE STATION Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 29-1-2022 IN C.P. NO. 11/2022 ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - II, PUNALUR Annexure 3 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 24-11-2023 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure 4 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 24-11-2023 SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial