Thursday, 14, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Midhun vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 12238 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 12238 Ker
Judgement Date : 17 May, 2024

Kerala High Court

Midhun vs State Of Kerala on 17 May, 2024

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
     FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 27TH VAISAKHA, 1946
                      CRL.MC NO. 1979 OF 2024
         CRIME NO.1329/2013 OF Kilimanoor Police Station,
                          Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.2370 OF 2016 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - IV, ATTINGAL
PETITIONER:

            MIDHUN
            AGED 32 YEARS
            S/O MADHUSOODHANAN. MS BHAVAN, CHANDRANELLOOR,
            VEROOR DESOM, VELLALLOOR VILLAGE,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-., PIN - 695601
            BY ADV P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)


RESPONDENTS:

     1       STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA, PIN - 682031
     2       NISARUDEEN
             AGED 66 YEARS
             S/O MUHAMMED KASSIM, DANA HOUSE, MADANTHAPACHA,
             KUDAVOOR VILLAGE, PC MUKKU PO, KALLAMBALAM,
             VARKALA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-.,
             PIN - 695141
OTHER PRESENT:

            SR.PP - T.R.RENJITH


      THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   17.05.2024,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   PASSED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C No.1979 of 2024           :2:



                           VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
          --    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
                       Crl.M.C No.1979 of 2024
          --    -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
                   Dated this the 17th day of May, 2024

                                  ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash

Annexure-A1 FIR & Annexure-A2 Final Report in CC No.

2370/2016 before the Judicial First Class magistrate Court-IV,

Attingal arising from Crime No.1329/2013 of Kilimanoor Police

Station, Thiruvananthapuram District as against the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is the 6th accused in CC No.2370/2016

before the Judicial First-Class magistrate Court-IV, Attingal arising

from Crime No. 1329/2013 of Kilimanoor Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram District registered for the offences alleged

under Sections 143,147,148,149,447,427 & 188 of the IPC.

3. The prosecution allegation is that on 07-12-2013 at 16 hrs

accused violating the orders of the court, trespassed into the

property of the defacto complainant and caused damages of

Rs.50,000/-.

4. The investigation is completed and Annexure- A1 FIR and

Annexure - A2 final report have been filed. The petitioner submits

that the issue involved in the case has been amicably settled

between the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent-defacto complainant

and the defacto complainant has submitted Annexure-A3 affidavit

in proof that the matter has been settled. The learned counsel for

the petitioner would submit that the matter has been settled and

the proceedings against the petitioner ought to have been quashed

and it was also submitted that considering the nature of the offence

alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the

proceedings.

5. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012)

10 SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases,

the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes

between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal

proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and

Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466]

and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and

Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

6. I have perused Annexure-A3 affidavit filed by the 2 nd

respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed a memo

whereby the report of the Inspector of Police, Kilimanoor Police

Station has been produced, which also shows that the defacto

complainant has expressed his willingness to settle the matter and

his statement recorded by the Inspector or Police, Kilimanoor

Police Station is also produced along with a memo. The learned

Public Prosecutor also submitted that upon verification it is

understood that the the affidavits are genuine, and the defacto

complainant stand on the contents thereof and satisfied that the

matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this

case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing.

The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in

futility.

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am

inclined to quash Annexure-A1 FIR & Annexure-A2 Final Report in

CC No. 2370/2016 before the Judicial First Class magistrate Court-

IV, Attingal arising from Crime No.1329/2013 of Kilimanoor Police

Station, Thiruvananthapuram District.

Sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE sm/

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.

1329/2013 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT Annexure A2 . THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO. 2370/2016 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-IV, ATTINGAL ARISING FROM CRIME NO. 1329/2013 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT Annexure A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter