Latheef vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 06, 2022

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1532019

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/1532019
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.
Decided On: Oct 06, 2022
Case Number: Crl.MC/6129/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Latheef

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....and sri.george renoy, learned counsel for the 2 nd crl.m.c.nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 4 respondent.4. prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly onthe ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. annexure-a2 affidavit sworn by the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is filed along with these crl.m.cs. to substantiate the settlement. in the said affidavit, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant 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.5. 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.crl.m.c.nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 5 in the result, these crl.m.cs. are allowed, and annexure-a1 final report submitted in crime no.936 of 2013 of tirur police station and all further proceedings in s.c.nos.674 of 2014 and 18 of 2021 on the files of the asst.sessions court, tirur against the petitioners are hereby quashed. sd/- ziyad rahman a.a. judge dg/6.10.22 crl.m.c.nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 6 appendix of crl.mc 6129/2022 petitioner annexuresannexure1 annexure a1 annexure2 annexure a2 affidavit of r2 crl.m.c.nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 7appendix of crl.mc 6130/2022 petitioner annexures annexure1 annexure a1 annexure2 annexure a2

Full Judgment

Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 14TH ASWINA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 6130 OF 2022 PETITIONERS: 1 MUHAMMED YASIN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. ASSAINAR, KUTTYAMAKKANAKATH HOUSE, PURATHOOR, PADINJAREKKARA, MALAPPURAM-676 562. 2 ARIF, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.HAMSAKOYA, THOTTAKKAL HOUSE, PURATHOOR, PADINJAREKKARA, MALAPPURAM-676 562. BY ADV.C.K.PREM RAJ RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 2 MOHAMMED RASHID, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL HAMEED, MANDAKATHINGAL HOUSE, THAZHEPALAM, TIRUR P.O MALAPPURAM-676 101. BY ADV.GEORGE RENOY ADV.SREEJA V-SR.Public Prosecutor THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.6129/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 14TH ASWINA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 6129 OF 2022 PETITIONER: LATHEEF, AGED 35, S/O MUHAMMADALI, ASAINARAKATH HOUSE, PURATHOOR P.O, PADINJAREKKARA, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 562. BY ADV.C.K.PREM RAJ RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA, STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031. 2 MOHAMMED RASHID, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O ABDUL HAMEED, MANDAKATHINGAL HOUSE, THAZHEPALAM, TIRUR PO, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 101. BY ADV.GEORGE RENOY THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.6130/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 3

ORDER

[Crl.MC Nos.6130/2022, 6129/2022] Petitioners in these Crl.M.Cs. are the accused in Crime No.936 of 2013 of Tirur Police Station. Petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.6130 of 2022 are the accused Nos.1 and 4 in the aforesaid crime, which is now pending as S.C.No.674 of 2014 before the Asst.Sessions Court, Tirur. The petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.6129 of 2022 is the 2nd accused in the aforesaid crime and the proceedings are now pending as S.C.No.18 of 2021 before the Asst.Sessions Court, Tirur. Aforesaid crime was registered against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 308 read with Section 34 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that on 04.03.2013 the

petitioners assaulted the 2nd respondent and caused injuries to him. Annexure-A1 is the final report submitted and these Crl.M.Cs are filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 as against the petitioners.

3. Heard Sri.C.K.Prem Raj, learned counsel for the petitioners in both the Crl.M.Cs., Smt.Sreeja V, Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.George Renoy, learned counsel for the 2 nd Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 4 respondent.

4. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on

the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-A2 affidavit sworn by the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is filed along with these Crl.M.Cs. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant 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.

5. 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.

Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 5 In the result, these Crl.M.Cs. are allowed, and Annexure-A1 final report submitted in Crime No.936 of 2013 of Tirur Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C.Nos.674 of 2014 and 18 of 2021 on the files of the Asst.Sessions Court, Tirur against the petitioners are hereby quashed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE DG/6.10.22 Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6129/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure1                  ANNEXURE A1
Annexure2                  ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT OF R2
Crl.M.C.Nos.6129, 6130 of 2022           7

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6130/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 ANNEXURE A1 Annexure2 ANNEXURE A2

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Latheef vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.