Jithin K Thomas vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Aug 25, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1384479

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/1384479
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K. Babu
Decided On: Aug 25, 2023
Case Number: Crl.MC/6803/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jithin K Thomas

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....are accused nos.1 to 3.3. the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under sections 498-a, 294(b), 323 and 34 of ipc and section 75 of the juvenile justice (care and protection of children) act, 2015.4. 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. crl.mc no. 6803 of 2023 37. the learned public prosecutor, on instructions, submitted thatthe 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. 6803 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. 6803 OF 2023 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 3RD BHADRA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 6803 OF 2023 AGAINST CC 1515/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, PATHANAPURAM PETITIONERS: 1 JITHIN K THOMAS, AGED 36 YEARS S/O. THOMAS, KODIYATTU, KOLOOR MUKKU, PATTAZHI, 2 BENCY THOMAS, AGED 56 YEARS S/O.THOMAS, KODIYATTU, KOLOOR MUKKU, PATTAZHI, 3 THOMAS, AGED 65 YEARS S/O. YOHANNAN, KODIYATTU, KOLOOR MUKKU, PATTAZHI, BY ADV ALEX K.JOHN RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 PREETHI, AGED 32 YEARS D/O. SHALEENA, MATHRU BHAVAN, KIZHAKKETHERUVU PO, MELILA, PIN - 691531 3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER KUNNIKODE POLICE STATION, KUNNIKODE PO, KOLLAM, PIN - 691508 R1 & R3 BY SMT.PUSHPALATHA M.K.-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY SRI.SRAYAS JOSEPH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

ON 25.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 6803 OF 2023 2

K.BABU, J.

-------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.6803 of 2023 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of August, 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.1515/2021 of Kunnikode Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.554/2022 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Pathanapuram on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement in respect of the subject matter.

2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498-A, 294(b), 323 and 34 of IPC and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

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. CRL.MC NO. 6803 OF 2023 3

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. CRL.MC NO. 6803 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 A1 FIR and Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.1515/2021 of Kunnikode Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.554/2022 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Pathanapuram stand hereby quashed. Sd/- K.BABU, JUDGE ab CRL.MC NO. 6803 OF 2023 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6803/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. POLICE STATION Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL CHARGE PRODUCED BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 11.06.2022 IN CRIME NO.1515 OF 2021 OF KUNNIKODE POLICE STATION Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 01.08.2023 EXECUTED BY 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL

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