Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Mathew Varghese vs State Of Kerala Represented By Its ... on 28 July, 2011

       

  

  

 
 
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                       PRESENT:

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

         TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MAY 2012/18TH VAISAKHA 1934

                             Crl.MC.No. 1654 of 2012 ()
                             -------------------------------
   (CRIME NO.296/2007 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION. KASARAGOD
                                      DISTRICT)
                                       ------------

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
----------------------------------------

       1. MATHEW VARGHESE, AGED 50 YEARS,S/O.VARGHESE,
          MADAPPALLIYIL HOUSE, AMBUNADU, MALAYIDAMTHURUTHU,
           KUNNATHUNADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

       2. S.A.ABDUL RASHEED, S/O.KUNHAMMAD, SRAMBIYEKKAL HOUSE,
          VADANAPPILLY, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

       3. S.A.ABDUL SALAM, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, SRAMBIYEKKAL HOUSE,
           AMAR COTTAGE, JUDGES AVENUE, KALOOR, KOCHI.

       4. V.A.HAREES,S/O.V.M.ABDUL KHADER, VALAMKOTTIL HOUSE
          EDAPPALLY P.O., KOCHI-682024.

          BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
------------------------------------------------

       1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
          REPRESENTING CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
          KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD-671121.

       2. VARIKODATH SYED ALAVI
          S/O.ABDHULLAKUTTI, VARIKODATH HOUSE
          KURUMBATHUR P.O.-676301, TIRUR TALUK
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

          R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. ABDUL SHUKOOR
          R2 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH

        THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
       08-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
svs

CRC. NO. 1654/2012


                            APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:


ANNEXURE-A1.    CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT DATED 28.7.2011 IN
     CRIME NO.296/2007 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE-A2.    TRUE COPY OF ONE TIME SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL DATED
     13.01.2012 ISSUED BY ANDHRA BANK.

ANNEXURE-A3.    TRUE COPY OF RECEIPTS DATED 19.01.2012 ISSUED BY
     ANDHRA BANK.

ANNEXURE-A3(a). TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 20.01.2012 ISSUED BY
     ANDHRA BANK.

ANNEXURE-A4.    AFFIDAVIT DATED 26.4.2012 EXECUTED BY 2ND
     RESPONDENT.


RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL

                                     /TRUE COPY/


                                     P.A. TO JUDGE.
svs



                      A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J
                    * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                   Crl.M.C.No. 1654 of 2012
                   ----------------------------------------
                Dated this the 8th day of May 2012

                               O R D E R

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing all proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.296 of 2007 of Kasargod Police Station pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court Kasragod. It is alleged that the petitioners were involved in commission of offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467 and 477 read with section 34 of I.P.C. Annexure A1 is the Final Report.

3. The de-facto complainant /2nd respondent has filed an affidavit stating that the matter has been settled between the parties and he does not intend to prosecute the case against the petitioners. Annexure A4 is the affidavit of 2nd respondent stating that the amounts have been paid and settled.

4. Though certain offences are not compoundable, in view of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Joshi v. State of Haryana [2003(2)KLT 1062(SC)]Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [AIR 2008 (S.C.) 1969], Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I [2008(3) KLT 769] and Manoj Sharma v. State [2008 Crl.M.C..No.1654/12 2 (4) KLT 417], the prosecution against the accused can be quashed under certain circumstances.

5. As matters stand settled as is evident from the affidavit and especially in view of the fact that the de facto complainant does not intend to proceed with the case, there is no point in prosecuting the case any further and it will lead to unnecessary hardship to the de facto complainant. Hence the principles adopted in the above judgments can be applied to the facts of this case also.

6. In the above circumstances, all proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.296 of 2007 of Kasargod Police Station pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court Kasragod are quashed.

Crl.M.C is disposed of as above.

(sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C..No.1654/12 3 Crl.M.C..No.1654/12 4 THOMAS.P.JOSEPH,J.

Crl.M.C.No. of 200

ORDER 19/01/2011