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.

Mohammed Rasheed vs the State of Kerala

Mohammed Rasheed vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 26, 2021
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1605665

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/883/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohammed Rasheed

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....police station for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 r/w 149 of ipc, now pending asc.c.no.279 of 2018 on the files of the chief judicial magistrate court, manjeri. the de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime wasregistered, is arrayed as the third respondent. annexure c affidavit has been filed by the third respondent stating that the dispute which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and he has no subsisting grievance in the matter.2. heard the learned public prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.3. having considered the gravity of theoffences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the third respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, i am satisfied that the dispute is settled and that no public interest isinvolved in this matter. the fact that the petitioners and the third respondent were students, is also taken into consideration.moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. as such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the honourable supreme court in madan mohan abbot v. state of punjab [(2008) 4 scc 582] and gian singh v. state of punjab and another [(2012) 10scc 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief sought. in the result, this crl.m.c is allowed. the proceedings in c.c.no.279 of 2018 on the files of the chief judicial magistrate court, manjeri is quashed.sd/- v.g.arun judge scl/26.02.2021 appendix petitioner's/s exhibits: annexure a true copy of the fir and fis in crime no.408/2018 of manjeri police station dated 7.8.2018. annexure b true copy of the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942 Crl.MC.No.883 OF 2021(A) CC 279/2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI CRIME NO.408/2018 OF Manjeri Police Station , Malappuram PETITIONER/S:

1 MOHAMMED RASHEED S/O.ABDULLA, PULIKKUTH HOUSE, VEEMBUR, MARIYAD P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2 SHIBILI, S/O. MOHAMMEDALI, POOZHIKKUTH, POOZHIKKUTH HOUSE, NARUKARA P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM 3 ABDUL VAHAB, AGED 23 YEARS S/O.MOHAMMED, PULITHODIKA HOUSE, MUSLIYARANGADI, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4 MOHAMMED AFSAL, S/O. MOHAMMEDALI, ATHIRTHIYIL HOUSE, CHERUPUTHOOR, OLAMATHIL P.O., MALAPPURAM 5 AZEEM K.V., S/O. MOHAMMED ASHARAF, KODAVANDI HOUSE,PALAKKULAM, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6 MOHAMMED MUSTHAFA, AGED 24 YEARS S/O. ALAVI, PALADAN HOUSE, CHEMBRASSERRY, PANDIKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

7 ASLAK HUSSAIN, S/O.HUSSAIN, NADUVALLI HOUSE, KARUVAMBRAM P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 8 MOHAMMED SAFWAN, S/O. ABDUL SALAM, ARUVEETTIL HOUSE, THAMARASSERI, NELLIKKUTH P.O., MALAPPURAM BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MANJERI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676121. 3 ATHUL C.K. S/O.MOHANDAS, CHENANKUNNIL HOUSE, PAPPINIPPARA, MANJERI, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN- 676122. R3 BY ADV. K.S.PRAVEEN OTHER PRESENT: SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 26th day of February, 2021 Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.408 of 2018 registered at the Manjeri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 r/w 149 of IPC, now pending as

C.C.No.279   of     2018      on    the     files    of   the     Chief
Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri.                   The de facto
complainant,      at     whose      instance        the   crime     was

registered, is arrayed as the third respondent. Annexure C affidavit has been filed by the third respondent stating that the dispute which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and he has no subsisting grievance in the matter.

2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.

3. Having considered the gravity of the

offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the third respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and that no public interest is

involved    in     this     matter.       The     fact     that    the
petitioners        and      the       third    respondent         were
students,     is     also     taken       into     consideration.

Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10

SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief sought. In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.279 of 2018 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri is quashed.

Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE Scl/26.02.2021 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO.408/2018 OF MANJERI POLICE STATION DATED 7.8.2018. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AND MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO.408/2018 OF THE MANJERI POLICE STATION DATED NIL. ANNEXURE C AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED, 4.2.2021.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial