Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 14TH ASWINA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 6096 OF 2022 CR.NO.126/2022 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION,CC 329/2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,NILAMBUR PETITIONER/ACCUSED: AYOOB, AGED 56 YEARS S/O UNNIMOIDHEEN, VADAKKAN HOUSE, KARAPPURAM P.O., NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679331 BY ADVS.P.SAMSUDIN MILAN RACHEL MATHEW RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN - 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDAKKARA POLICE STATION, EDAKKARA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN - 679331 3 SAJIDA, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O AYOOB, VADAKKAN HOUSE, KARAPPURAM PO, MUTHEDOM, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679331 BY ADV M.ANUROOP G.SUDHEER, PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:2:-
ORDER
Dated this the 6th day of October, 2022 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.126/2022 of Edakkara Police Station on the ground of settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioner is the accused. The 3rd respondent is the defacto-complainant.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC.
4. The respondent No.3 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 petitioner, Sri. M. Anuroop, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Sri. G. Sudheer, the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by the respondent No.3 would show that the entire -: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 any Court.
8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected -:4:-
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). 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. All further proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.126/2022 of Edakkara Police Station hereby stands quashed.
Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp -:5:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6096/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLIANT AND FIR IN CRIME NO. 126/ 2022 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT AND MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO. 126/ 2022 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED IN TO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 3RD RESPONDENT Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 18-07-2022 SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT