Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1945 CRIME NO.435/2023 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: RAJESH V R, AGED 50 YEARS S/O RAMANKUTTY NAIR, RAJ BHAVAN, THRICHATTUKULAM P O, CHERTHALA, PIN - 688524 BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV RAAJESH S.SUBRAHMANIAN V.VINAY M.S.ANEER SARATH K.P. PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH ANILKUMAR C.R. RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKUALM, PIN - 682031 2 ASWATHY BABU AGED 24 YEARS D/O BABU KK, KARINKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MULANTHURUTHY P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682314 BY ADVS. R1 BY SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN C.DHEERAJ RAJAN(K/579/2013) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 5028 OF 2023 2
K.BABU, J.
-------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.5028 of 2023 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2023
O R D E R
The prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash Annexure I FIR in Crime No.435/2023 of Thrikkakara Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant to it on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement in respect of the subject matter.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.435/2023.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 354 and 341 of IPC.
4. Respondent No.2, the defacto complainant entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn to by her has also been placed before this Court.
5. Heard both sides.
6. I have perused the averments in the petition and the affidavit sworn to by respondent No.2.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the matter was enquired into through the Investigating Officer, who has taken statement of the defacto complainant, 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 victim agreed to settle the matter with her 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. Laxmi 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.
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 Laxmi 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 I FIR in Crime No.435/2023 of Thrikkakara Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant to it stand hereby quashed.
Sd/- K.BABU, JUDGE ab APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5028/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FIS IN CRIME NO 435/2023 Annexure-II AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL