Rukkia vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 17923 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
   WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 10TH BHADRA, 1943
                     CRL.MC NO. 3642 OF 2021
  (AGAINST CRIME NO. 1172 OF 2013 OF CHENGAMAND POLICE STATION,
   ERNAKULAM DISTRICT ALLEGED TO HAVE COMMITTED OFFENCES UNDER
SECTIONS 406, 420, 463, 464, 465, 471 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF THE
                               IPC)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1235/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
               OF FIRST CLASS -I, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 6:

    1     RUKKIA,
          AGED 92 YEARS
          W/O. LATE ALIKUNJU, SIDHIQ MANZIL, VELIYATHUNADU P.O.,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101.

    2     YUSUF SIDHIQ,
          AGED 70 YEARS
          S/O. LATE ALIKUNJU, THAPASIA, VELIYATHUNADU P.O.,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101.

    3     OURANGASEB,
          AGED 65 YEARS
          S/O. LATE ALIKUNJU, RESIDING AT AVANTHIKA,
          VELIYATHUNADU P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101.

    4     ABDUL MALIK
          AGED 64 YEARS
          S/O. LATE ALIKUNJU, SIDHIQ MANZIL, VELIYATHUNADU P.O.,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101.

    5     GEETHA RAI,
          AGED 67 YEARS
          W/O. ABDUL JALEEL, RESIDING AT CHETHANA, VELIYATHUNADU
          P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101.

    6     SHAMSHADHA BEEGUM,
          AGED 65 YEARS
          W/O. ABDUL, ALTHARA ROAD, THOTTAKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683108.

          BY ADVS.
          DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN
          MANOJ VASU
          VINOD S. PILLAI
          C.DEEPA
 Crl. M.C. NO. 3642 OF 2021
                                      2
            SREELAKSHMI R.
            MOHAMMED THAYIB N.M.
            NAYANA VARGHESE
            ANSU SARA MATHEW



RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

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




     2      MOHAMMED RAFI,
            AGED 55 YEARS
            S/O. SYED MOHAMMED, VEZHAPPILLY CHEMBIKKATTUPARAMBIL
            VELIYATHUNADU, ALANGAD KARA, KARUMALOOR VILLAGE,
            PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683101.

            BY ADV K.A.ABHILASH


            SR.PP - SRI. T.R.RENJITH




     THIS   CRIMINAL   MISC.   CASE   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
01.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl. M.C. NO. 3642 OF 2021
                                      3




                                   ORDER

This is an application filed under Section 482 of the

Cr.P.C. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 1172 of 2013 of

Chengamand Police Station, which was registered alleging

offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 463, 464, 465, 471

read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2. It is alleged that, on 29.11.2013, petitioners with the

intention of cheating and obtain unlawful gain, created document

in favour of the 2nd respondent, on the mis representation that the

subject property belonged to the accused persons. Thus Annexure

A2 complaint was preferred before Court on the basis of which

the crime was registered alleging very same offence. Thereafter

on conclusion of investigation charge sheet has been laid before

the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Court I, Aluva, where the case

has been taken on file as C.C.No. 1235 of 2015.

3. Now the petitioners contend that, the matter has been

settled with the 2nd respondent, the defacto complainant. In

support of the said contention, Annexure A4 affidavit of the

defacto complainant has also been produced. Crl. M.C. NO. 3642 OF 2021

4. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the

learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

5. On the very face of the allegations, it is a private dispute

between the petitioners on the one hand and the 2nd respondent on

the other. That dispute has been settled out of Court and now

even the defacto complainant does not want to pursue the

proceedings. He has stated that the matter has been settled and he

does not intend to proceed against the applications.

6. It is certain that it was a private dispute. No public

interest is involved in the matter. So long as the 2 nd respondent

has informed that he has settled the matter with the accused

persons, there is no purpose in proceeding further. In the

circumstances, in exercise of jurisdiction under Section Section

482 of the Cr.P.C, further proceedings can be quashed.

7. The petition is allowed. All proceedings pursuant to

Crime No.1172 of 2013 of Chengamand police station are here

by quashed.

Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed as above.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL JUDGE RMV/01/09/2021 Crl. M.C. NO. 3642 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3642/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.1172/2013 OF CHENGAANAD POLICE STATION DATED 02/11/2013.

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED UNDER SECTION 190(2) A, 200 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALUVA BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/10/2013.

Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO.

1235/2015 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALUVA ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 1172/2013 OF CHENGAMANAD POLICE STATION DATED 15/02/2014.

Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 05/08/2021.