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.

Mahesh vs State of Kerala

Mahesh vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 08, 2022
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1441186

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/165/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mahesh

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....offences alleged against the petitioners are under sections 451, 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(i) of ipc.2. the allegation against the petitioner is that, on 28.11.2019, on account of the previous animosity, petitioner assaulted the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and caused injuries to him.3. annexure a1 is the final report submitted by the police in respect of the said offence. this crl.m.c is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to annexure -a1.4. heard sri.v. mithun p, learned counsel for the petitioner, sri.sri.ranjit george, learned public prosecutor for the state and sri. jaeona james, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.5. prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. to substantiate the settlement, annexure-a2 affidavit sworn by the 2 ndrespondent is filed with this crl.m.c. in the said affidavit, the 2 nd respondent has expressly acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed his no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. the learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd respondent also confirms the same. the learned public prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the station house officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine.6. the allegations would reveal that the dispute is purelyprivate in nature. in such circumstances, by applying the principles laid down by the honourable supreme court in gian singh v. state of punjab and another [(2012) 10 scc 303], proceedings can be quashed by invoking the powers of this court under section 482 cr.p.c. this is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to continue.in the result, this crl.m.c. is allowed, and annexure-a1 final report submitted in crime no.2146 of 2019 of museum police station and all further proceedings in c.c no.280 of 2020 on the files of the judicial first.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1944 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 280/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III,TRIVANDRUM

PETITIONER/S: MAHESH AGED 33 YEARS S/O. MANIYAN, RESIDING AT TC 43/1020, PATHMA NIVASE, PARUTHIKUZHI, MANACAUD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 009 BY ADVS. MITHUN P. HARISHMA P. THAMPI RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN 682 031 2 NITHIN RAJ AGED 24 YEARS S/O. SELVARAJ, RESIDING AT RAJABHAVAN HOUSE, KONDANKKARA, KEEZHEMAM, CHENKAL, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 122 BY ADV JAEONA JAMES OTHER PRESENT: SRI RANJIT GEORGE, SR PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.2146 of 2019 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram which is now pending as C.C No.280 of 2020 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court- III, Thiruvananthapuram. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 451, 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(i) of IPC.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that, on 28.11.2019, on account of the previous animosity, petitioner assaulted the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and caused injuries to him.

3. Annexure A1 is the Final Report submitted by the police in respect of the said offence. This Crl.M.C is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure -A1.

4. Heard Sri.V. Mithun P, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Sri.Ranjit George, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. Jaeona James, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.

5. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. To substantiate the settlement, annexure-A2 affidavit sworn by the 2 nd

respondent is filed with this Crl.M.C. In the said affidavit, the 2 nd respondent has expressly acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed his no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd respondent also confirms the same. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine.

6. The allegations would reveal that the dispute is purely

private in nature. In such circumstances, by applying the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], proceedings can be quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to continue.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-A1 Final report submitted in crime No.2146 of 2019 of Museum Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C No.280 of 2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram are hereby quashed.

Sd/- sab ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 165/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE SHEET, IN CRIME NO. 2146 OF 2019 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT Annexure A2 THE AFFIDAVIT SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT Annexure A3 THE ORDER IN CRIMINAL M.C NO. 5078 OF 2021 DATED 09-12-2021

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial