Gireesh vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 7447 Ker

Crl.M.C.No.2247/2022                      1

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
         FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
                          CRL.MC NO. 2247 OF 2022
         CRIME NO.331/2015 OF Valayam Police Station, Kozhikode
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN LP 24/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                           FIRST CLASS ,NADAPURAM
PETITIONER:

              GIREESH,
              AGED 41 YEARS,
              SON OF CHEKKAI,
              KALLU KOTHIYIL HOUSE,
              CHEKKIAD POST, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 509.

              BY ADVS.
              M.P.PRIYESHKUMAR
              P.V.ANOOP
              PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP



RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1        STATE OF KERALA,
              PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
              ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682 031.

     2        MOOSA,
              AGED 67 YEARS,
              SON OF KUNHABDULLA,
              KOMBIPANNANGOTT HOUSE,
              PARAKKADAVU (PO), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673 509.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
              K.V.SREERAJ


      THIS    CRIMINAL   MISC.   CASE   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.2247/2022                      2

                                ORDER

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.331 of 2015 of

Valayam Police Station, which is now pending as L.P.No.24 of 2021

before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram. The

offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under

Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 427, 447 and 308 read with Section

149 IPC.

2. The Prosecution case is that on 27.08.2018 at 9.30 pm

the petitioner and other accused have formed themselves into an

unlawful assembly, and in prosecution of their common object,

attacked the 2nd respondent. Annexure-A is the FIR and Annexure-B

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

quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-B final

report.

3. Heard Sri.Priyesh Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri.M.P.Prasanth, learned Public Prosecutor for the State

and Sri.Sreeraj K.V., learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.

4. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on

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

Annexure-D 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 2nd 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.

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

Section 308 IPC. However, it is discernible from the records that all

the accused except the petitioner have faced trial. The prosecution

against the other accused culminated in Annexure-C judgment, by

which all of them were acquitted. On perusal of the observations

made in the judgment, it is discernible that the learned Sessions

Judge arrived at the conclusion that the prosecution miserably

failed in establishing the guilt of the accused persons who faced the

trial. On account of the observations made therein, substratum of

the case of prosecution is also lost. in such circumstances, I am

inclined to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court, taking into account

the settlement arrived between the parties and also the

observations made in Annexure-C judgment by which other accused

persons were acquitted.

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

report submitted in Crime No.331 of 2015 of Valayam Police Station

and all further proceedings in L.P.No.24 of 2021 on the file of

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram against the

petitioner are hereby quashed.

Sd/-

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

JUDGE DG/27.6.22

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2247/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.331 OF 2015 OF VALAYAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

Annexure B A COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.331/2015 WHICH IS NOW PENDING AGAINST THE PETITIONER AS L.P.NO.24/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, NADAPURAM

Annexure C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.07.2018 IN S.C.NO.575/2016 BY THE SECOND ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE, KOZHIKODE

Annexure D THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT DATED 29.03.2022