Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 9TH JYAISHTA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 516 OF 2022 CC 806/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, NILAMBUR CRIME NO.461/2021 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 VINU, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, 2 THOMAS, AGED 68 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, 3 MOLI THOMAS, AGED 59 YEARS, W/O.THOMAS, BY ADV P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. ..2.. 2 LEENA VINU, AGED 37 YEARS, D/O.THOMAS, MAMKOOTTATHIL HOUSE, POOLAPOIKA, MOOTHEDAM P.O., NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679 331. R1 BY SMT M K PUSHPALATHA -SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY ADV SHYAM NAIR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ..3..
ORDER
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.461/2021 of Edakkara Police Station on the ground of settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 3. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498A, 406 and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
4. The respondent No.2 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.
5. I have heard Sri.P.Samsudin, the learned counsel for
the petitioners, Sri.Shyam Nair, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1.
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 criminal proceedings further. The learned Prosecutor, on ..4.. 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 by 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 Final Report in Crime No.461/2021 of Edakkara Police Station. The offences in question do not fall within the category of ..5.. offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra). For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.461/2021 of Edakkara Police Station hereby stands quashed.
Sd/- DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE skj ..6.. APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 516/2022 PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO.461/2021 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION. Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE CRIME NO.461/2021 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION. Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 06.01.2022 SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.