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.

T.K. Aboobacker Vs. the State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam and Another

T.K. Aboobacker vs The State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 13, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/946794

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.No. 772 of 2012
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

T.K. Aboobacker

Respondent

The State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam and Another

Excerpt

p.s. gopinathan, j. 1. in this petition under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, petitioner, who is the second accused in c.c. 562 of 1995 on the file of the judicial magistrate of the first class - ii, hosdurg, seeks an order to quash all further proceedings against him. the offence alleged is under section 420 ipc. the plea is that the matter has been settled between the first accused and the complainant and accordingly, the first accused was acquitted under section 320(8)of the code of criminal procedure as evidenced by annexure a3 order. the fact that the complainant and the first accused compounded the matter would not enable the second accused to have an order of acquittal under section 320 (8) of the code of criminal procedure. neither is he entitled to get an order to quash further proceedings under section 482 cr.p.c. in the event the matter is settled between the petitioner and the complainant, the offence being a compoundable one, though with the permission of the court, petitioner is at liberty to file a petition under section 320 (2) of the code of criminal procedure before the trial court. 2. learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the offence is mainly alleged against the first accused and since the case between the complainant and the first accused is compounded, petitioner is also entitled to an order of acquittal. having gone through annexure a1 complaint, i am not inclined to accept the contention because involvement of the petitioner is specifically pleaded in the complaint. however, it is for the petitioner to seek for compounding under section 320 (2) cr.p.c. or to seek discharge under section 245 (1) or (ii) cr.p.c. the learned counsel for the petitioner also sought for permission to argue for discharge in absence. that is a matter to be considered by the trial court on appropriate proceedings. in the result, this petition is dismissed without prejudice to the defence of the petitioner.

Full Judgment

P.S. GOPINATHAN, J.

1. In this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner, who is the second accused in C.C. 562 of 1995 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class - II, Hosdurg, seeks an order to quash all further proceedings against him. The offence alleged is under Section 420 IPC. The plea is that the matter has been settled between the first accused and the complainant and accordingly, the first accused was acquitted under Section 320(8)of the Code of Criminal Procedure as evidenced by Annexure A3 order. The fact that the complainant and the first accused compounded the matter would not enable the second accused to have an order of acquittal under Section 320 (8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Neither is he entitled to get an order to quash further proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In the event the matter is settled between the petitioner and the complainant, the offence being a compoundable one, though with the permission of the court, petitioner is at liberty to file a petition under Section 320 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the trial court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the offence is mainly alleged against the first accused and since the case between the complainant and the first accused is compounded, petitioner is also entitled to an order of acquittal. Having gone through Annexure A1 complaint, I am not inclined to accept the contention because involvement of the petitioner is specifically pleaded in the complaint. However, it is for the petitioner to seek for compounding under Section 320 (2) Cr.P.C. or to seek discharge under Section 245 (1) or (ii) Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner also sought for permission to argue for discharge in absence. That is a matter to be considered by the trial court on appropriate proceedings.

In the result, this petition is dismissed without prejudice to the defence of the petitioner.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial