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.

Riyas vs Ramees

RIYAS vs Ramees

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 14, 2022
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1546885

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/6829/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

RIYAS

Respondent

Ramees

Excerpt

.....of perinthalmanna police station, which is now pending as c.c. no.728/2018 before the judicial first class magistrate's court-i, perinthalmanna. the offences alleged against the petitioners are under sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 324 read with section 149 of the indian penal code.2. the prosecution case is that, on 23.03.2018 at around9 p.m., the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, obstructed the motorcycle ridden by the 1 st respondent, and assaulted him with an iron rod. annexure-1 is the f.i.r. and annexure-2 is the final report submitted by the police. this crl.m.c. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to annexure-2 final report.3. heard sri. p.g. gokulnath, the learned counselappearing for the petitioners, smt. sreeja v., the learned senior :4 : public prosecutor for the state and sri. hasheem muhammed p.m., the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st respondent.4. the prayer for quashing the proceedings is soughtmainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. annexure-3 affidavit sworn by the 1 st respondent is filed along with this crl.m.c. to substantiate the settlement. in the said affidavit, the 1st respondent 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 1 st 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.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.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 22ND ASWINA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 6829 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCC 728/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, PERINTHALMANNA PETITIONER/S:

1 RIYAS AGED 27 YEARS KOTTATHODI HOUSE, CHERUKARA PO, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679340 2 AMAL AGED 25 YEARS KAVUMPURATH HOUSE, ERAVIMANGALAM PO, 3 AMARNATH KOLANGARAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERUKARA PO, 4 MUHAMMED SHANID THOTTASSERI HOUSE, ERAVIMANGALAM PO, 5 KARVARNAN AGED 24 YEARS KALANGADAN HOUSE, CHERUKARA PO, 6 ADARSH KAVUMPURATH HOUSE, CHERUKARA PO, 7 ABHILASH K AGED 25 YEARS KAVUMPURATH HOUSE, ERAVIMANGALAM PO, 8 NAVANEET AGED 24 YEARS PANACHIKKAL HOUSE, CHERUKARA PO, BY ADV P.G.GOKULNATH :2 :

RESPONDENT/S: 1 RAMEES AGED 26 YEARS VALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUNNAKKAV PO, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679340 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV HASHEEM MUHAMMED P M ADV SREEJA V -SR PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: :3 :

ORDER

Dated this the 14th day of October, 2022 The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 8 in crime No.235/2018 of Perinthalmanna Police Station, which is now pending as C.C. No.728/2018 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Perinthalmanna. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution case is that, on 23.03.2018 at around

9 p.m., the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, obstructed the motorcycle ridden by the 1 st respondent, and assaulted him with an iron rod. Annexure-1 is the F.I.R. and Annexure-2 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-2 final report.

3. Heard Sri. P.G. Gokulnath, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior :4 : Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. Hasheem Muhammed P.M., the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st respondent.

4. The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought

mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-3 affidavit sworn by the 1 st respondent is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 1st respondent 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 1 st 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.

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 :5 : allowing the prosecution to continue. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-2 final report submitted in crime No.235/2018 of Perinthalmanna Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No.728/2018 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Perinthalmanna, against the petitioners are hereby quashed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE ncd :6 : APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6829/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 A TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.235/2018 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT Annexure2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.235/2018 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT Annexure3 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22/09/2022

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial