Aji G @ Daniel vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 16, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1405102

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/1405102
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K. Babu
Decided On: Feb 16, 2023
Case Number: Crl.MC/8837/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Aji G @ Daniel

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....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, 406, 294(b), 509 & 34 of the ipc.4. the 3rd respondent, the defacto complainant entered appearance through counsel. an affidavit sworn to by her has also been placed before the court.5. heard both sides.6. i have perused the averments in the petition and the affidavit sworn to by respondent no.3.7. the learned public prosecutor, on instructions, submittedthat 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. 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.9. in the instant case, the dispute is purely personal innature. 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.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 27TH MAGHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 8837 OF 2022 IN CC 1017/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , ADOOR PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3: 1 AJI G @ DANIEL, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. GOVINDASWAMY, AJI BHAVANAM, KOPPARAZHIKATHU, THUVAYOOR SOUTH P.O., KADAMBANAD VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., 2 THANKACHAN, AGED 75 YEARS, S/O. GEEVARGHESE, KOPPARAZHIKATHU, THUVAYOOR SOUTH P.O., KADAMBANAD VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., 3 ANIAMMA, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O THANKACHAN, KOPPARAZHIKATHU, THUVAYOOR SOUTH P.O., KADAMBANAD VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT., BY ADVS. K.SHAJ BEENA N.KARTHA VINAYAK G MENON BHARAT VIJAY P. MINU VITTORRIA PAULSON MAJID MUHAMMED K. RESPONDENTS/ STATE/ DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ENATHU POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA., PIN - 691526 3 SIJI CHERIAN AGED 29 YEARS D/O. SAJI CHERIAN, KANNAMKARA PUTHENVEEDU, CHOORAKODE P.O, ERATHU VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT ., PIN - 689551 BY ADVS.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR M.K.PUSHPALATHA Sergi Joseph Thomas THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

K.BABU, J.

-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of February, 2023

ORDER

The prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.336/2019 of Enathu Police Station, and all further proceedings in C.C.No.1017/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor, 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, 406, 294(b), 509 & 34 of the IPC.

4. The 3rd respondent, the defacto complainant entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn to by her has also been placed before the Court.

5. Heard both sides.

6. I have perused the averments in the petition and the affidavit sworn to by respondent No.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. 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.

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 A2 Final report in Crime No.336/2019 of Enathu Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No. 1017/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor stand hereby quashed. Sd/- K.BABU, JUDGE TR APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8837/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO. 336/2019 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT

IN C.C. NO. 1017/2019 PENDING BEFORE THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A3 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/ DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT STATING THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES WITH THE PETITIONERS HEREIN PERTAINING TO THE REGISTRATION OF ANNEXURE A1 CRIME.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Aji G @ Daniel vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice K. Babu