Rasiq vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 8548 Ker

Crl.M.C.No.2034/22                   1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
    WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944
                      CRL.MC NO. 2034 OF 2022
    CRIME NO.106/2019 OF Nadapuram Police Station, Kozhikode
     AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 413/2019 OF JUDICIAL
                MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,NADAPURAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

     1       RASIQ,
             AGED 41 YEARS,
             RESIDING AT KALLARAKUNNUMEL HOUSE,
             NADAPURAM P.O, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 695 008.

     2       RIYAS,
             AGED 39 YEARS,
             RESIDING AT THAZHEKUNNIL HOUSE,
             PURAMERI P.O, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 695 008.

             BY ADV.MITHUN P.



RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

     1       STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULUM, PIN - 682 031.

     2       ABDURASHEED,
             AGED 41 YEARS,
             RESIDING AT CHUNDAYULLA PARAMBATH HOUSE,
             NARIPPATTA P.O, PIN - 673 506.

             BY ADV HARISHMA P. THAMPI


      THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.2034/22                            2




                                  ORDER

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.106 of

2019 of Nadapuram Police Station, which is now pending as

C.C.No.413 of 2019 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,

Nadapuram. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under

Sections 341, 324 read with Section 34 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that on 10.03.2019, the petitioners

have wrongfully restrained the 2 nd respondent while he was riding a

motor cycle and thereby caused injuries to him. Annexure-A1 is the

final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for

quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 final

report.

3. Heard Sri.Mithun, learned counsel for the petitioners,

Smt.Seena C., learned Public Prosecutor for the State and

Smt.Harishma P.Thampi, learned counsel for the 2 nd respondent.

4. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on

the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled.

Annexure-A2 affidavit sworn by the 2nd respondent/de facto

complainant is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the

settlement. In the said affidavit, the 2 nd respondent/de facto

complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement

and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against

the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd

respondent/de facto complainant also confirms the same. The learned

Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station

House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and

found it to be genuine.

5. The allegations would reveal that the dispute is purely

private in nature. In such circumstances, by applying the principles

laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State

of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], proceedings can be

quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482

Cr.P.C. This is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no

fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to

continue.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-A1 final

report submitted in Crime No.106 of 2019 of Nadapuram Police

Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.413 of 2019 on the file

of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram, against the

petitioners are hereby quashed.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

JUDGE DG/7.7.22

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2034/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL CHARGE IN CRIME NUMBER 106 / 2019 OF NADAPURAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

Annexure A2 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 27.10.2021, SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT