Full Judgment
CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 CC 142/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, PERINTHALMANNA PETITIONER/ACCUSED: 1 RAFEEQ, AGED 37 YEARS S/O MOIDEEN HAJI, 2 NASAR AGED 48 YEARS S/O MOIDEEN HAJI, 3 FATHIMA AGED 67 YEARS W/O MOIDEEN HAJI, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 4 ISHABI AGED 33 YEARS D/O MOIDEEN HAJI, BY ADV P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031 CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 2 2 RISNA BILKEES AGED 32 YEARS D/O MUHAMMED, ULLANGADAN HOUSE, MULLAMPARA, MANJERI PO, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PIN - 676121 R1 BY SMT.T.V.NEEMA-SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R2 BY ADV M.ANUROOP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 3
O R D E R
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in C.C.No.142/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perinthalmanna on the ground of settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioners is the accused Nos.1 to 4. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498A and 406 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.Samsudin Panolan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.M.Anuroop, 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
CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 4 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 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 any Court. CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 5
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 C.C.No.142/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perinthalmanna hereby stands quashed. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE ab CRL.MC NO. 5911 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5911/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, MANJERI Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 96/2019 OF KOLATHUR POLICE STATION Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 27-07-2022 SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL