Samad @ Shams vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 10, 2022

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1444648

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/1444648
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Mar 10, 2022
Case Number: Crl.MC/483/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Samad @ Shams

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....police station and all further proceedings in c.c. no.510/2021 on the files of the judicial first class magistrates court, muvattupuzha on the ground of settlement between the parties.2. the petitioner is the accused. the 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.3. the offences alleged against the petitioner are under sections.452,354 and 354a(i),(ii) of the ipc.4. the 2nd respondent entered appearance through counsel. an affidavit sworn in by her is also produced. ..3..5. i have heard sri.s.sreedev, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and smt.t.v. neema, the learned senior public prosecutor.6. the averments in the petition as well asthe affidavit sworn in by the 2nd respondent 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 ofpunjab [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 ..4..held that the high court invoking s.482 of cr.p.ccan 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 harmonywill be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to annexure-a2. the offences in question do not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2022/19TH PHALGUNA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 483 OF 2022 CRIME NO.336 OF 2021 OF THE MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SAMAD @ SHAMS AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.KHADER, MECHIKKULATHI, ANIKKADU, AVOLY P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. S.SREEDEV ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL RONY JOSE LEO LUKOSE SUZANNE KURIAN CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 2 ALFONSA JOY AGED 55 YEARS, W/O. JOY, KANNATTU HOUSE, ANIKKADU, AVOLY P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686670 BY ADV. SMT T V NEEMA -SR PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

O R D E R

Dated this the 10th day of march, 2022 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.336/2021 of the Muvattupuzha Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No.510/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrates Court, Muvattupuzha on the ground of settlement between the parties.

2. The petitioner is the accused. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections.452,354 and 354A(i),(ii) of the IPC.

4. The 2nd respondent entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced. ..3..

5. I have heard Sri.S.Sreedev, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt.T.V. Neema, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

6. The averments in the petition as well as

the affidavit sworn in by the 2nd respondent 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 ..4..

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-A2. 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).

..5.. 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-A2 Final Report in Crime No.336/2021 of the Muvattupuzha Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No.510/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrates Court, Muvattupuzha stands hereby quashed. Sd/- DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE ded/10.03.2022 ..6.. APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 483/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.336/2021 OF THE MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION Annexure2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT

DTD. 28.04.2021 IN CRIME NO. 336/2021 OF THE MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT-I, MUVATTUPUZHA. Annexure3 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DTD. 03.01.2022 EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Samad @ Shams vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath