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.

Musammil vs State of Kerala

Musammil vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 09, 2022
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1440755

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/118/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Musammil

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the learned public prosecutor.6. the averments in the petition as well as the affidavitsworn in by the respondent no.2 would show that the entire crl.mc no. 118 of 2022 4 dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the crime 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 he 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 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 notwithstandingthe bar under s.320 of cr.p.c. if it is warranted in the given factsand circumstances of the case or to ensure ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any court.8. the dispute in the above case is purely personal incrl.mc no. 118 of 2022 5 nature. no public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to annexure 2 final report. 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 further. accordingly, the crl.m.c. is allowed. annexure 2 final report in crime no.301/2021 of hosdurg police station stands hereby quashed. sd/- dr. kauser edappagath judge ab crl.mc no. 118 of 2022 6 appendix of crl.mc 118/2022 petitioner annexures annexure1 the true copy of the fir in crime no. 301 of 2021.....

Full Judgment

CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 CRIME NO.301/2021 OF HOSDRUG POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: 1 MUSAMMIL, AGED 25 YEARS 2 UYAIS, AGED 24 YEARS 3 MINSHAD, AGED 24 YEARS 4 SABEEL, AGED 27 YEARS 5 ARAFATH, AGED 25 YEARS BY ADV RAHUL SASI RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 HAKKIM, AGED 43 YEARS PATTILLATH HOUSE, HOSDURG KADAPPURAM, HOSDURG VILLAGE KASARGOD - 671 315 CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 2 3 SUHAIL, REPRESENTED BY HIS NEXT FRIEND AND FATHER; HAKKIM PATTILLATH HOUSE, HOSDURG KADAPPURAM, HOSDURG VILLAGE BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR NIRMAL V NAIR SRI M P PRASANTH-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 3

O R D E R

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure 2 Final Report in Crime No.301/2021 of Hosdurg Police Station on the ground of settlement between the parties.

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

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 326 and 427 r/w 149 of IPC.

4. The respondent No.2 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by him is also produced.

5. I have heard Sri.Rahul Sasi, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Nirmal V.Nair, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri.M.P.Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit

sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 4 dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the crime 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 he 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 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 ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.

8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in

CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 5 nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure 2 Final Report. 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 further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure 2 Final Report in Crime No.301/2021 of Hosdurg Police Station stands hereby quashed. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE ab CRL.MC NO. 118 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 118/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 301 OF 2021 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION. Annexure2 THE TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 301 OF 2021 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION. Annexure3 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 28.12.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Annexure4 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED

28.12.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON BEHALF OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS HIS LEGAL GUARDIAN AND FATHER. RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES : NIL

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial