Mujeeb vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 9766 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
   WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 22ND BHADRA, 1945
                       CRL.MC NO. 6836 OF 2023
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 1091/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                      FIRST CLASS ,IRINJALAKUDA
PETITIONERS:


    1     MUJEEB,AGED 30 YEARS,POOVANTHUMKADAVIL (H),THANISHERI
          DESOM,THANISHERI (P.O),MANAVILASHERI VILLAGE,THRISSUR,
          PIN - 680701

    2     ADHARSH,AGED 28 YEARS,VAKAYIL HOUSE ,PAZHUVIL
          DESOM,KURUMBILAVU VILLAGE,THRISSUR, PIN - 680564

          BY ADVS.
          SALMAN FARIS
          FASILUL FAHMIDA K.
          WAFA MARIYAM
          NIDHA FAZLIYA A.R.
          SAMAH ABDUL MAJID


RESPONDENT/S:
     1     THE STATE OF KERALA,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,KERALA, PIN -
           682018

    2     THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION
          ,IRINJALAKUDA NORTH, THRISSUR RURAL, PIN - 680125

    3     RINGU MARIYA,KOONAMMAVU HOUSE,KORIMBISSERY
          DESOM,MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE,THRISSUR, PIN - 680701


OTHER PRESENT:
           SRI. G SUDHEER (PP)


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl. M.C No.6836/2023                         -2-

                                         ORDER

The petitioners are accused in Crime No.323/2018 of Irinjalakuda Police Station,

Thrissur which is now pending as CC 1091/2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Irinjalakuda alleging commission of offences under Sections 341, 323, 354 read

with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the

complaint came to be filed by the de facto complainant on the basis of a misunderstanding.

It is submitted that the entire disputes between the petitioners and the de facto

complainant have been settled as is evident from Annexure 2 affidavit executed by the 3 rd

respondent. The learned counsel therefore prays that the proceedings may be quashed on

the basis of settlement.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that a statement has been recorded

from the 3rd respondent and confirms that she does not wish the continue the prosecution

against the petitioners.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the

learned Public Prosecutor and having regard to the contents of Annexure 2 affidavit, I am

of the view that the proceedings against the petitioners can be terminated in exercise of the

jurisdiction vested in this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. No

public purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings in C.C 1091/2018 on the file

of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Irinjalakuda.

Therefore this Criminal M.C is allowed and all further proceedings against the

petitioners, in C.C 1091/2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Irinjalakuda, will stand quashed.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE AMG

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6836/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT OF CRIME NO.323 OF 2018 OF IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION,THRISSUR

Annexure2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SHOWN BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3