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.

Jishnu vs Public Prosecutor

Jishnu vs Public Prosecutor

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 22, 2023
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1411741

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/9632/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jishnu

Respondent

Public Prosecutor

Excerpt

.....class magistrate court, kodungallur, thrissur, arising from crime no.996/2021 of valappad police station, thrissur, registered for the offences under sections 323 and 324 r/w section 34 of the indian penal code, 1860. respondents 2 and 3 are the defacto complainant and the injured witness.3. heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from the learned public prosecutor.4. the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that thematter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. it was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.5. in gian singh v. state of punjab and another [(2012) 10scc 303], the apex court has held that in appropriate cases, the high court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. this view was reiterated in narinder singh and others v. state of punjab and another [(2014) 6 scc 466] and yogendra yadav and others v. state of jharkhand and another [(2014) 9 scc 653].6. i have perused annexure a3 and annexure a4 affidavits filedby respondents 2 and 3. the learned public prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto complainant and the other deponent stand by the contents thereof. i am satisfied that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this case. there is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. the continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.7. accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners inc.c. no.2359/2021 on the files of the judicial first class magistrate court, kodungallur, are quashed. this crl.m.c is allowed as above. sd/- bechu kurian thomas judge jka/22.02.23. appendix of crl.m.c. no.9632/2022 petitioners annexures annexure a1 the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 3RD PHALGUNA, CRL.MC NO. 9632 OF 2022 IN C.C. NO.2359/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KODUNGALLUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED PERSONS NO.1 TO 4: 1 JISHNU AGED 27 YEARS S/O. RENJITH, KAREPARAMBIL HOUSE, 2 SHREEJITH AGED 24 YEARS S/O. RENJITH, KAREPARAMBIL HOUSE, 3 AVINASH AGED 24 YEARS S/O. THAMBI, PULAYAKKAL HOUSE,

4 ADHARSH AGED 23 YEARS S/O. KISHOR, MARAKKATUPADI HOUSE, VALAPPAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680567 BY ADV D.VIMAL DEV RESPONDENTS: STATE/THE 2ND AND 3RD RESPONDENTS: 1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 JITHIN AGED 30 YEARS S/O. SUGATHAN, THOPPIL HOUSE, VALAPPAD VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680567 3 SHAHID AGED 28 YEARS S/O. HAMSA, PUDUVIGHAL HOUSE, CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT., PIN - 680566 BY ADV SYAM N.B. OTHER PRESENT: SMT. SREEJA. V PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

==================== ===================== Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2023

ORDER

Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C. No.2359/2021 on

the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur, Thrissur, arising from Crime No.996/2021 of Valappad Police Station, Thrissur, registered for the offences under Sections 323 and 324 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 2 and 3 are the defacto complainant and the injured witness.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

5. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10

SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

6. I have perused Annexure A3 and Annexure A4 affidavits filed

by respondents 2 and 3. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto complainant and the other deponent stand by the contents thereof. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.

7. Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in

C.C. No.2359/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur, are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jka/22.02.23. APPENDIX OF CRL.M.C. NO.9632/2022 PETITIONERS ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR NO 996 OF 2021 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION THRISSUR Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO 2359 OF 2021 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT KODUNGALLUR THRISSUR Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial