Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 8TH MAGHA, 1943 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 158/2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , HARIPAD (CRIME NO.15/2022 OF KAREELAKULANGARA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SUBOD AGED 37 YEARS S/O NARAYANA PILLAI, VILAYITHEKKATHIL(AALAKOTTU), MALAMELKODU MURI, CHEPPAD-690 507 BY ADVS. R.SUNIL KUMAR A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. 2 SARADHA W/O NARAYANA PILLAI, ALAKKOTTU, MALAMELKKODE, CHEPPAD, ALAPPUZHA-690 507. BY ADV ARUN KRISHNA OTHER PRESENT: GP- SRI.M.P.PRASANTH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No. 15/2022 of Kareelakulangara Police Station, Alappuzha District on the ground of settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioner is the accused. The second respondent is the defacto complainant.
3. The offence alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 294(b), 323, 308 of IPC.
4. The respondent No.2 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.
5. I have heard Sri.R.Sunil KUmar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Arun Krishna, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri. M.P.Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by
the respondent No.2 would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the crime further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was amicably settled.
7. The Apex Court 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 in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to ensure ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.
8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No
public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure. A1.The offences in question do not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra).
9. For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.15/2022 of Kareelakulangara police Station, Alappuzha District stands hereby quashed.
Since FIR has been quashed, the petitioner shall be released from the judicial custody forthwith. DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE al/- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 480/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 COPY OF THE F.IR IN CRIME 151/2022 Annexure 2 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure 3 COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE PETITIONER Annexure 4 COPY OF THE SERVICE CERTIFICATE OF THE
PETITIONER Annexure 5 COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MP NO 158/22 OF JFMC, HARIPAD DATED 15.1.22 Annexure 6 COPY OF THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT