Kerala High Court
Ashique vs State & Defacto Complainant on 16 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 26TH CHAITHRA, 1943
Crl.MC.No.1522 OF 2021(A)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 254/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -I, PERINTHALMANNA
CRIME NO.659/2017 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 ASHIQUE, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. MOHAMMED ASHARAF,
NADUVILEKALATHIL HOUSE, PULLOOR, MANJERI-680 121
2 MOHAMMED RASHIK, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. MOODAKUTTY,
AYINIKUTH HOUSE, NARUKARA, MANJERI-676 122
3 AJMAL NISHAD, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. ALAVIKUTY,
AMBALAVAN HOUSE, VELLOOR P.O.,-676 517
BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.
RESPONDENTS:STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
1 STATE OF KERALA, REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA POLICE
STATION, MALAPPURAM-679 321
3 SHINE, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. SHAJI, MUTATHUPARAMBIL
HOUSE, BHOODANAM COLONY, POTHUKAL, BHODANAM P.O.,
NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM-676 542
4 SREERAJ, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. RAJAN, KALLUVAYIL
HOUSE, P.O.NEERORAM, PANAMRAM, WAYANAD-670 645
5 VISHNU, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. SANTHOSH, VENDAKKAMCHALIL
HOUSE, P.O.MAIKKARA, THAMARASSERI, KOZHIKODE-673 573
BY ADVS.
SRI.B.H.ANSIL
SRI CM KAMMAPPU
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl MC 1522/21
2
O R D E R
The petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.254/2018
on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1,
Perinthalmanna, arising out of Crime No.659/2017 of
Perinthalmanna Police Station, for having allegedly
committed the offences punishable under Sections 341,
323 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The de facto complainant is the 3 rd respondent
herein, who, along with respondents 4 and 5, has appeared
through Adv.B.H.Ansil and has filed affidavits as Annexures
B, C and D stating that the matter has been amicably
settled and that they have no existing grievance against
the petitioners. The offences alleged are purely personal in
nature and no serious prejudice will be caused to the public
if the settlement is recognised. Further, possibility of the
case ending in conviction is also very remote, if not
impossible due to the said settlement. Recognising the said
settlement augurs better in the interests of all.
3. Reliance can be placed on the decisions in Gian
Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108], Narinder
Crl MC 1522/21
Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another
[(2014) 6 SCC 466)] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v.
State of Jharkhand [(2014) 9 SCC 653] for recognizing
the settlement entered into by the parties.
4. In view of the settlement arrived at between the
petitioners and respondents 3 to 5, the petitioners are
entitled to get the proceedings quashed under Section 482
of the Cr.P.C. It is also pertinent to note that the
petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents.
In the result, the Crl.M.C.is allowed and all
proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.254/2018 on
the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1,
Perinthalmanna, arising out of Crime No.659/2017 of
Perinthalmanna Police Station, stands quashed under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
RR JUDGE
Crl MC 1522/21
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE-A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
IN CRIME NO.659/2017 OF
PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE-B AFFIDAVIT OF THIRD RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE-C AFFIDAVIT OF FOURTH RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE-D AFFIDAVIT OF FIFTH RESPONDENT
