Sainul Abeed vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 787 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

     FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 18TH POUSHA, 1942

                      Crl.MC.No.7151 OF 2019(D)

  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 55/2018 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
                   MAGISTRATE COURT-I,ERNAKULAM

   CRIME NO.438/2017 OF ERNAKULAM SOUTH RAILWAY POLICE STATION


PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

             SAINUL ABEED
             AGED 33 YEARS
             S/O.MUHAMMAD, KUNNUMPURATH HOUSE, KODOORKARA,
             ONGALLOOR, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.K.M.MADHU
             SMT.VISHNUJA AJAYAN

RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

      1      STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA, PIN-682031

      2      DR. FAIZAL MAVULLADATHIL
             AGED 46 YEARS
             S/O.KUNJAMMAD, THAIKANDIYIL HOUSE, KAYAKKODI.P.O.,
             KOZHIKODE PIN-673508

             R2 BY ADV. BIJU.V.JOHN

OTHER PRESENT:

             SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.MC.No.7151 OF 2019(D)       ..2..




                             ORDER

Dated this the 8th day of January 2021

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.438/2017

registered at the Ernakulam South Railway Police

Station for offences punishable under Sections 511

and 379 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.55/2018 on

the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-

I, Ernakulam. The de facto complainant, at whose

instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the

2nd respondent. Annexure-A2 affidavit has been filed

by 2nd respondent stating that the dispute, which

was the reason for the incident and registration of

the crime, has been resolved amicably and he has

no subsisting grievance against the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,

who, on instructions, submits that the petitioner Crl.MC.No.7151 OF 2019(D) ..3..

has 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 2 nd

respondent, the contents of which are submitted to

be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the

dispute is settled and no public interest is involved

in this matter. 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. Crl.MC.No.7151 OF 2019(D) ..4..

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The

proceedings in C.C.No.55/2018 on the files of the

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam

is quashed.

Sd/-

                                      V.G.ARUN
      SB/08/01/2020                     JUDGE
 Crl.MC.No.7151 OF 2019(D)        ..5..




                            APPENDIX
      PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

      ANNEXURE A1       THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT

DATED 6.12.2017 IN CC NO.55/2018 OF CRIME NO.438/2017 OF ERNAKULAM SOUTH RAILWAY POLICE STATION OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ERNAKULAM

ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT OF 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT //true copy// P.A to Judge