Full Judgment
CRL.MC NO. 1541 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 1541 OF 2022 CRIME NO.525/2020 OF Mulavukad Police Station, Ernakulam PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 LIN, AGED 24 YEARS S/O JOHNSON, KUTTUNGAL HOUSE, PAMAMBUKADU, VALLARPADAM P.O. ERNAKULAM-, PIN - 682504 2 SANOOP, AGED 28 YEARS S/O SAJI P.K, PERINOGTH HOUSE, PAMAMBUKADU, VALLARPADAM P.O. ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682504 BY ADVS. M.B.SOORI K.S.STEJO RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 SHEREENA K N, AGED 37 YEARS W/O RAFEEK, PLAPARAMBIL HOUSE, FISHERIES ROAD, SOUTH PUTHUVYPE, ERNAKULAM RURAL, KERALA, PIN - 682508 BY ADVS. R1 BY SMT.T.V.NEEMA, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY SRI.ALWIN JOSEPH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 1541 OF 2022 2
O R D E R
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.525/2020 of Mulavukad Police Station on the ground of settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(1) and 509 r/w 34 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.M.B.Soori, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Alwin Joseph, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 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 respondent No.2 would show that the entire CRL.MC NO. 1541 OF 2022 3 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 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 the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of CRL.MC NO. 1541 OF 2022 4 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. 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).
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.525/2020 of Mulavukad Police Station hereby stands quashed.
Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE ab CRL.MC NO. 1541 OF 2022 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1541/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 525/2020 OF MULAVUKAD POLICE STATION Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 525/2020 OF MULAVUKAD POLICE STATION Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22-02-202 RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL