Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 10388 OF 2023 CRIME NO.960/2021 OF MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.1049 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II(MOBILE),ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/ACCUSED: HARI AGED 35 YEARS S/O UNMESH, POZHIKAL HOUSE, MARARIKULAM NORTH PANCHAYATH, WARD 4, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688549 BY ADVS. MANU HARSHAKUMAR GOVIND CHANDRABHANU ANJALI NAIR MARY ANN SAJI RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 SRUTHI D/O MOHANAN, PARAKKOTHU, SEETHARAM MILL LINE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680002 R1 BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S.HRITHWIK R2 BY SRI. ADARSH S. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:2:- Dated this the 12th day of March, 2024
ORDER
The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, to quash Annexure-I First Information Report[FIR], Annexure-II Final report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.1049/2022 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Alappuzha.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime
No.960/2021 of the Mararikulam Police Station, Alappuzha, registered against him at the instance of the second respondent, for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code,1860.
3. The gist of the prosecution is that: the accused was married to the second respondent on 3.2.2019. Few days after the marriage, the accused started to harass the second respondent demanding more money and mentally and physically harassed her. Thus, the -:3:- accused has committed the above offence.
4. Heard; Sri. Manu Harshakumar, the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.C.S. Hrithwik., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and Sri.Adarsh S., the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has amicably settled the
dispute with the second respondent, who has voluntarily executed Annexure-III affidavit, stating that she has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner and has no objection in all further proceedings in the above crime being quashed. Hence, the petition may be allowed.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Investigating Officer has ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the parties has been amicably settled -:4:- and the second respondent has voluntarily signed Annexure-III affidavit. Moreover, the marriage between the petitioner and the second respondent has been dissolved by a decree of divorce.
7. The learned counsel for the second
respondent also vouched for the execution of Annexure III affidavit by the second respondent. He submitted that the second respondent has no objection in the proceedings being quashed.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs.
State of Punjab [2012 (10) SCC 303] and Prabatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and another [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that in the facts and circumstances of the case and to secure the ends of justice, where the High Court is satisfied that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and the offence is not serious in nature involving mental depravity,
-:5:- criminal proceedings may be quashed.
9. On a consideration of the facts, the rival
submissions made across the Bar, and the materials on record, especially after going through Annexure-III affidavit sworn in by the second respondent, which has been found to be genuine and bona fide by the Investigating Officer, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court, particularly since the alleged offences are not serious in nature, no public interest is involved, the chances of conviction is remote, the continuation of the proceeding would only be wastage of judicial time and the settlement would augur harmony in the society. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition. In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Annexure-I First Information Report[FIR], Annexure-II Final report in Crime No.960/2021 of Mararikulam Police Station, Alappuzha and all further proceedings
-:6:- in C.C.No.1049/2022 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Alappuzha, as against the petitioner. The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly. SD/- C.S.DIAS,JUDGE rmm/12/3/2024 -:7:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10388/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure I CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO Annexure II CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CC 20.09.2021