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.

Jain vs State of Kerala

JAIN vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 29, 2021
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1629938

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/2179/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

JAIN

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....2711, marappalam junction, pattom ward, kowadiar village, thiruvananthapuram - 695003. 3 addl.r3. sasikala, d/o. pankajakshi, seenivas, tc 3/2711, marappalam junction, pattom ward, kowadiyar village, thiruvananthapuram 695 003 [is impleaded as per order dated 29.11.2021 in crl.m.a.4/2021] sri.arjun sathish kumar r.leelaother present: pp sangeetharaj nr this criminal misc. case having come up for admission on 29.11.2021, the court on the same day passed the following:orderthis crl.m.c. has been filed seeking to quash the entire further proceedings against the petitioners/accused no.1 to 3 in c.c.no.243/2012 on the file of additional chief judicial magistrate court, thiruvananthapuram, which arose out of crime no.766/2011 of petta police station, registered for the offence punishable u/s.188, 109, 294(b), 354, 324 and 341 of ipc.2. it is alleged that the petitioners trespassed into the house of 2nd respondent and abused him using filthy language and also assaulted him with a cane chair.3. second respondent is the son of the third petitionerand also the brother of the 1st petitioner. mother-in-law of the 2nd respondent is impleaded as additional third respondent. second respondent's marriage with the daughter of additional 3 rd respondent was solemnized on 3.9.2010. there was some matrimonial dispute between his wife - sreedevi and the petitioners.4. adv. sri. arjun sathish kumar appeared for respondents 2 and 3.5. pws 1 to 5 have already been examined. subsequently the parties arrived at a compromise. annexure a is the copy of final report in the above crime. affidavits of the 2 nd and 3rd respondents have been produced.6. it has come out from the affidavits duly sworn in by therespondents 2 and 3 and the statement given by them to the sho that the entire issues between the parties have been amicably settled they are also close relatives.7. since parties resolved the entire issues, continuance ofthe proceedings against them will be an abuse of process of.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 2179 OF 2021 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 243/2012 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CRIME NO.766/2011 OF PETTA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 JAIN AGED 46 YEARS S/O. SUJATHA RAJAPPAN, KALYANAKRISHNA VEEDU, ORUVATHILKOTTA, TC NO. 79/377, KADAKKAMPALLY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004. 2 KANI DEVADAS AGED 59 YEARS S/O. DEVADAS, PUSHPAVADI HOUSE, A-7, AISWARYA NAGAR, KESHAVADASAPURAM, PATTOM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004. 3 SUJATHA RAJAPPAN AGED 75 YEARS W/O. RAJAPPAN, KALAYANIKRISA HOUSE, TC 79/377(1), ORUVATHILKOTTA, KADAKKAMPALLY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004. PREEJA V.P. GEORGE BRISTON V.P.PRASANTH

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682031. 2 ANURAJ RAJAPPAN AGED 41 YEARS S/O. RAJAPPAN, SREE NIVAS, T.C 2711, MARAPPALAM JUNCTION, PATTOM WARD, KOWADIAR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695003. 3 ADDL.R3. SASIKALA, D/O. PANKAJAKSHI, SEENIVAS, TC 3/2711, MARAPPALAM JUNCTION, PATTOM WARD, KOWADIYAR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 003 [IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 29.11.2021 IN CRL.M.A.4/2021] SRI.ARJUN SATHISH KUMAR R.LEELA

OTHER PRESENT: PP SANGEETHARAJ NR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This Crl.M.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire further proceedings against the petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 in C.C.No.243/2012 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, which arose out of crime No.766/2011 of Petta Police Station, registered for the offence punishable u/s.188, 109, 294(b), 354, 324 and 341 of IPC.

2. It is alleged that the petitioners trespassed into the house of 2nd respondent and abused him using filthy language and also assaulted him with a cane chair.

3. Second respondent is the son of the third petitioner

and also the brother of the 1st petitioner. Mother-in-law of the 2nd respondent is impleaded as additional third respondent. Second respondent's marriage with the daughter of additional 3 rd respondent was solemnized on 3.9.2010. There was some matrimonial dispute between his wife - Sreedevi and the petitioners.

4. Adv. Sri. Arjun Sathish Kumar appeared for respondents 2 and 3.

5. PWs 1 to 5 have already been examined. Subsequently the parties arrived at a compromise. Annexure A is the copy of Final Report in the above crime. Affidavits of the 2 nd and 3rd respondents have been produced.

6. It has come out from the affidavits duly sworn in by the

respondents 2 and 3 and the statement given by them to the SHO that the entire issues between the parties have been amicably settled they are also close relatives.

7. Since parties resolved the entire issues, continuance of

the proceedings against them will be an abuse of process of court. Therefore, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.243/2012 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram, which arose out of crime No.766/2011 of Petta Police Station. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, Crl.M.C. stands allowed. Sd/- M.R.ANITHA JUDGE shg APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2179/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT NUMBERED AS CC NO. 243 OF 2012 DATED 31.08.2011 SUBMITTED BY PETTA POLICE. Annexure B A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 20.07.2021 SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEADED.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial