AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
13 paragraphs · 235 wordsBechu Kurian Thomas, J
Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.2037/2020 of Pothencode Police Station, Trivandrum. They are alleged to have commited offence under
sections 294(b), 323, 325, 341, 427, 324, and 34 of IPC.
The defacto complainant is arrayed as the r3d respondent while the injured are arrayed as respondents 4 to 7. It is submitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire matters have been settled and affidavits have been produced. Annexures A2 to A6 are the
affidavits which reflecting the intention of the defacto complainant and the injured to settle the matter. Adv. Sri. P. Anoop(Mulavana) who appears for
respondents 3 to 7 affirm the contents of the affidavit as true. The learned Public Prosecutor also, on instructions, submit that the matter has been
settled and there is no reason to doubt the veracity of the affidavit.
On a perusal of the nature of the allegation in the F.I.R and the surrounding circumstances I am of the view that there is no public interest involved
in the matter and the offences alleged are not heinous in nature. In the circumstances, there is no reason to continue the proceedings against the
petitioners, especially in the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
Accordingly, the Crl.M.C is allowed and all proceedings in Crime No.2037/2020 on the files of the Pothencode Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram
shall stand quashed.