SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 10146

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
AMAL.K.M – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC 6318 2023



Advocates:
J.R.PREM, NAVAZ, SUMEEN S.MUHAMMED, SWADIQ

The court affirmed that prior criminal records are sufficient to deny quashing of proceedings based on settlement.

Headnote:

Quashing - Criminal Procedure - Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., Sec. 308 IPC - The court ruled against quashing proceedings due to previous criminal involvement and noted that settled matters should go back to trial courts for discharge applications.

Fact of the Case:

The Crl.M.C. seeks to quash proceedings based on a settlement. The Public Prosecutor noted prior criminal involvement of the petitioners, including offenses under Sec. 308 IPC.

Finding of the Court:

The court determined that the matter of quashing did not warrant consideration and suggested that petitioners approach the trial court for appropriate relief.

Issues: Whether the court should quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement despite the petitioners' previous criminal history.

Ratio Decidendi: Previous criminal involvement of petitioners under Sec. 308 IPC justified refusal to quash the proceedings via Crl.M.C.

Final Decision: Crl.M.C. disposed of without quashing proceedings, suggesting petitioners file for discharge in trial court.

O R D E R

This Crl.M.C. is filed to quash the proceedings in Sessions case No. 479 of 2022 of Asst.Sessions Judge, Perumbavoor invoking the powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the matter is settled and the affidavit filed by the victims are also produced. But the Public Prosecutor submitted that the 4th petitioner is involved in one case and the 3rd petitioner is involved in two cases and he is also included in the rowdy list of Karinkunnam Police Station. A perusal of the reports submitted by the Station House Officer, Kalady would show that the offences alleged in the cases registered against the petitioners include the offence under Sec. 308 IPC . In the present case also, the offence alleged includes Sec.308 .

2. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that this Crl.M.C. to quash the proceedings based on settlement need not be entertained. The petitioners can approach the trial court and file appropriate application for discharge. If such an application is filed, the court concerned will consider the same in accordance with law.

With the above observation, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6318/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO: 1173 OF 2019 OF KALADY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT Annexure A2 THE AFFIDAVIT, SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE

2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED

24/3/2023 Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT, SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE

3RD RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED

24/3/2023 Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT, SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE

4TH RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED

24/3/2023 Annexure A5 THE AFFIDAVIT, SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE

5TH RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED

24/3/2023

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top