Full Judgment
CRL.MC NO. 2092 OF 2023 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU MONDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 2092 OF 2023 AGAINST CC 1424/2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, CHALAKUDY PETITIONER: XXX BY ADV T.N.MANOJ RESPONDENT/S: 1 YYY 2 YYY 3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA., PIN - 682031 BY ADVS. R1 & R2 BY SRI.ANESH PAUL FREDY FRANCIS(K/243/2014) R3 BY SRI.G.SUDHEER-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 2092 OF 2023 2
K.BABU, J.
-------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2092 of 2023 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of March, 2023
O R D E R
The prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash Annexure (a) Final Report in Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement in respect of the subject matter.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 323 and 294(b) of IPC and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
4. Respondent Nos.1 and 2, the victims, entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn to by the 1st respondent has also been placed before the Court.
5. Heard both sides.
6. I have perused the averments in the petition and the affidavit CRL.MC NO. 2092 OF 2023 3 sworn to by the 1st respondent.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the matter was enquired into through the Investigating Officer, who has taken statements of the victims, and it is reported that the dispute between the
parties has been amicably settled. The material placed before the Court shows that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the defacto complainant has decided not to proceed further. The settlement between the parties is found to be voluntary and fair. The settlement or the compromise satisfies the conscience of the Court. It is seen that the victims agreed to settle the matter with their free will.
8. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)],
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Lakshmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] the Apex Court held that the High Court, invoking Section 482
of Cr.P.C., can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non- compoundable offences, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case, to ensure ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.
CRL.MC NO. 2092 OF 2023 4
9. In the instant case, the dispute is purely personal in nature.
There is nothing to show that public interest will be compromised by quashing the proceedings. The offences in question do not fall within the category of serious offences or heinous offences.
10. The offences in the present case do not fall within the category
of offences prohibited for granting permission to compromise in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Lakshmi Narayan (supra).
11. This Court is of the view that no purpose will be served in
proceeding with the matter further. Resultantly, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure (a) Final Report in Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy stand hereby quashed. Sd/- K.BABU, JUDGE ab