Kerala High Court
Sajeesh vs State Of Kerala on 17 March, 2021
CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.289 OF 2021(E)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 759/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD
CRIME NO.250/2017 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 6:
1 SAJEESH
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.VIJAYALAKSHMANAN,THALAPOTTA
HOUSE,KALLAMPARAMBU,KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
2 VINESH,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O.VIJAYALAKSHMANAN,THALAPOTTA
HOUSE,KALLAMPARAMBU,KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI.P.O,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
3 SAJEESH @ KANNAN,
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O.SWAMINATHAN,SAKTHI
NIVAS,MANDEKKADU,KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
4 SHIJU,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O.KESAVAN,MANDEKKADU HOUSE,
KINAVALLOOR,PARALI.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
5 SREEYESH,
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O.SREENIVASAN,SANTHI NIVAS,VILLWOM
KADU,KINAVALLOOR.P.O, PARALI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
6 SANESH,
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.VASUDEVAN,KUNNIL HOUSE,KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021
2
BY ADV. SRI.P.R.AJITHKUMAR
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT&OTHER INJURED:
1 STATE OF KERALA
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 DARVIN T.DAVID,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O.T.A.DAVID,THADAATHIL PARAMBU VEEDU,
KINAVALLOOR.P.O, PARALI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678612.
3 PRASANTH.K.P,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/.O.PRABHAKARAN,KIZHAKKUMPURAM VILLAGE,
KINAVALLOOR(PO),PARALI,PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678612.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021
3
ORDER
Dated this the 17th day of March 2021
Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 6 in Crime
No.250/2017 registered at the Mankara Police Station,
Palakkad for offences punishable under Sections 143,
147, 148, 323, 324, 341 & 326 read with Section 149 of
IPC, now pending as C.C. No.759/2017 on the files of
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad. The de
facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was
registered and the other injured persons have filed
Annexure-B affidavits, stating that the dispute, which
was the reason for the incident and registration of the
crime, has been resolved amicably and they have no
subsisting grievance against the petitioners.
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 affidavits filed by the 2nd & 3rd respondents and the
CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021
other injured person, 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.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed.
The proceedings in C.C.No.759/2017 on the files of
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad is
quashed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
NB/17.03.2021
CRL.M.C.NO.289 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.251/2017 OF MANKARA POLICE
STATION,PALAKKAD
ANNEXURE B THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE
RESPONDENT N0.2 AND 3.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A. TO JUDGE
