A.Ashokan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 31, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1369994

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1369994
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K. Babu
Decided On: Jul 31, 2023
Case Number: Crl.MC/5039/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A.Ashokan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....at a settlement in respect of the subject matter.2. the petitioner is the sole accused in c.c.no.1321/2015.3. the offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under sections 406 and 498-a r/w section 34 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 thatcrl.mc no. 5039 of 2023 3 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. crl.mc no. 5039 of 2023 49. 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.....

Full Judgment

CRL.MC NO. 5039 OF 2023 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2023 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 5039 OF 2023 AGAINST CC 1321/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - V,KOZHIKODE PETITIONER: A.ASHOKAN, AGED 55 YEARS S/O. KUTTAPPAN, ALANGATT HOUSE, OLAVANNA AMSOM DESOM, NEAR VANDANA BUS STOP, KOZHIKODE, PIN - BY ADVS. NIRMAL.S VEENA HARI K. REMIYA RAMACHANDRAN KEERTHY JOHNSON ROSE MARIYAT JOSE POOJA JOSE RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA. (REP. BY THE SHO, NALLALAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE.), PIN - 682031 2 ARCHANA, AGED 41 YEARS D/O SUJANAPAL, RESIDING AT SUJANAM HOUSE, NALLALAM VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673027 R1 BY SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY ADV MANAS P. HAMEED THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 5039 OF 2023 2
K.BABU, J.
-------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.5039 of 2023 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of July, 2023

O R D E R

The prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash Annexure A1 FIR and Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.9/2006 of Nallalam Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.1321/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court V, Kozhikode 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 C.C.No.1321/2015.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 406 and 498-A r/w Section 34 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

CRL.MC NO. 5039 OF 2023 3 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. CRL.MC NO. 5039 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 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 A2 Final Report in Crime No.9/2006 of Nallalam Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.1321/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court V, Kozhikode stand hereby quashed. Sd/- K.BABU, JUDGE ab CRL.MC NO. 5039 OF 2023 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5039/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.9/2006 DATED KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT NO. C.C.1321/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE. Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties A.Ashokan vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice K. Babu