Ajith vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 12119 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
     THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 1ST POUSHA, 1944
                          CRL.MC NO. 7169 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT SC 392/2013 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT &
                  SESSIONS COURT - III, MAVELIKKARA
PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

           AJITH
           AGED 26 YEARS
           SON OF KOCHUKUNJU, ANIL BHAVAN, IDAKUNNAM MURI, NOORANADU
           VILLAGE, NOORANADU PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT , PIN -
           690503

           BY ADV ALEX K.JOHN



RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

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

     2     ANAZ BADAR
           AGED 37 YEARS
           SON OF BADHARUDIN , UNAISE MANZIL, CHUNAKARA SOUTH,
           CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT , PIN - 690504

     3     STATION HOUSE OFFICER
           NOORANADU POLICE STATION, NOORANADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
           PIN - 690504, REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF
           KERALA, ERNAKULAM , PIN - 682031

           BY ADV M.R.ARUNKUMAR


           ADV VIPIN NARAYAN-PP

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                                      2

Crl.M.C No.7169 of 2022



                                ORDER

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.270/2005 of

Nooranadu Police Station which is now pending as L.P. No.15/2009

before the Additional Sessions Court-III, Mavelikkara. The offences

alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are

punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 308 of Indian Penal Code

read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-A1 is the

FIR and Annexure-A2 is the final report submitted by the Police.

2. Earlier, the trial in this case was conducted before the

Additional Sessions Court-III, Mavelikkara as S.C No. 392/2013 in

which the 1st accused alone participated. Annexure-A3 is the

judgment passed in the said case in which the 1 st accused was

found not guilty and accordingly he was acquitted. The case

against the petitioner has been split up and it is now included in

the long pending register as L.P No.15/2009 before the Additional

Sessions Court-III, Mavelikkara. This Crl.M.C is filed for quashing

all further proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to

Annexure-A2.

Crl.M.C No.7169 of 2022

3. Heard Sri. Alex K John, the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner, Sri. Vipin Narayan, the learned Public Prosecutor

appearing for the State and Sri. Arun Kumar, the learned counsel

appearing for the 2nd respondent.

4. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is

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

between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the

same, the injured person/2nd respondent has sworn Annexure-A4

affidavit. The aforesaid affidavit indicates that, the matter has

been settled and the 2nd respondent has no subsisting grievance

against the petitioner herein. He also conveyed that he has no

objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioner

herein. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/injured person

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 2nd respondent has reiterated that, he does not have

any objection in quashing the proceedings as he has no subsisting

grievance against the petitioner herein.

Crl.M.C No.7169 of 2022

5. 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 petitioner 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.

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

of Indian Penal Code. It is discernible from the records that, the

1st accused had already faced the trial and he was acquitted

because of the reason that the prosecution failed to adduce any

evidence to substantiate the same. I have gone through the

contents of Annexure-A3 judgment by which the said accused was

acquitted. After perusing the same, and also taking into account

the settlement between the parties, I am of the view that no

fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the continuation of

the prosecution as against the petitioner. In such circumstances, I

Crl.M.C No.7169 of 2022

am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section

482 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings

pursuant to Annexure-A2, final report in Crime No.270/2005 of

Nooranadu Police Station and all further proceedings in L.P No.

15/2009 which is now pending before the Additional Sessions

Court-III, Mavelikkara as against the petitioner who is the 2nd

accused are hereby quashed.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE rpk

Crl.M.C No.7169 of 2022

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7169/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR DATED 30.07.2005 IN CRIME NO. 270/2005

Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL CHARGE DATED 10.08.2006

Annexure A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - III, MAVELIKKARA DATED 24.07.2018 IN CRIME NO. 270/2005

Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, WHO IS THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT