Mohammed Alias Podimon vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 11794 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
 WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA,
                                  1944
                      CRL.MC NO. 8628 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT SC 848/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                    OF FIRST CLASS -I,ATTINGAL
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS 1 AND 2:
    1     MOHAMMED ALIAS PODIMON AGED 32 YEARS
          S/O THAHIRUDEEN, EZHUTHILAKKODU VEEDU, PALLICKAL
          VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT .
          PIN - 690503

     2    ABDULLA ALIAS ABU AGED 26 YEARS
          SO/ SHAJAHAN, PANAYIL VEEDU, MOTTAMOODU, PALLICKAL
          VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN., PIN -
          690503

          BY ADV P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)

RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE:
    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
          KERALA., PIN - 682031

     2       NASEEM
             S/O ABDUL SATHAR, HISHANA MANZIL, ARAMAM,
             PALLICKAL PO, PALLICKAL VILLAGE,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT ., PIN - 690503

          BY ADV A.CHANDRA BABU


             ADV. VIPIN NARAYAN - PP



      THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   21.12.2022,    THE   COURT   ON     THE   SAME   DAY   PASSED   THE
FOLLOWING:
                                   2

Crl.M.C No.8628 of 2022

                             ORDER

The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime

No.29/2016 of Pallickal Police Station which is now pending as S.C

848/2017 before the Assistant Sessions Court, Attingal. The

offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under

Sections 324, 341 and 308 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal

Code. Annexure-1 is the Final Report submitted by the Police.

The 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant. This Crl.MC is filed

for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-1.

2. Heard Sri. P.Anoop (Mulavana), the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Vipin Narayan, the learned

Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri.K.K.Rajeev, the

learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

3. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is

sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute

between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the

same, the defacto complainant has sworn Annexure-2 affidavit.

The aforesaid affidavit indicates that, the matter has been settled

and the defacto complainant has no subsisting grievance against

Crl.M.C No.8628 of 2022

the petitioners herein. He also conveyed that he has no objection

in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The

learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant also

confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon

instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was

verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the

SHO also, the defacto complainant has reiterated that, he does not

have any objection in quashing the proceedings as he has no

subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein.

4. Going through the materials available on record, it is

discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on

account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose

would be served if the proceedings against the petitioners herein

were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a

successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view

that going by the decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and

Another [2012(4) KLT 108], this is a fit case in which the

powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure can be invoked.

Crl.M.C No.8628 of 2022

5. It is true that, one of the offences is under Section 308

of Indian Penal Code. However, it is discernible from the records

that, no serious injuries were sustained by the 2 nd

respondent/defacto complainant. No criminal antecedents of the

petitioners were brought to my notice. In such circumstances, I

deem it appropriate to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C and quash the proceedings.

Accordingly, this Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure-1 Final Report

in Crime No.29/2016 of Pallickal Police Station and all further

proceedings in S.C.No.848/2017 pending before the Assistant

Sessions Court, Attingal as against the petitioners are hereby

quashed.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE rpk

Crl.M.C No.8628 of 2022

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8628/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure1 CERTIFIDE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 29/2016 OF PALLICKAL POLICE STATION

Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT