Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 12TH MAGHA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 6556 OF 2021 CC 347/2019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 ARUN. C S/O. CHANDRABABU, VALSA BHAVAN, MNRA A-4, KUNNATHU 2 CHANDRABABU, AGED 57 YEARS VALSA BHAVAN, MNRA A-4, KUNNATHU VADAKE MADOM, KUDAPPANAKUNNU VILLAGE, KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695043. 3 VALSA, AGED 50 YEARS W/O. CHANDRABABU, VALSA BHAVAN, MNRA A-4, KUNNATHU 4 ARCHANA VALSA, D/O. CHANDRABABU, VALSA BHAVAN, MNRA A-4, KUNNATHU -:2:- 5 ANJANA VALSA, D/O. CHANDRABABU, VALSA BHAVAN, MNRA A-4, KUNNATHU BY ADV BIJU MATHEW
RESPONDENT/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 ANJALIDEV AGED 23 YEARS D/O. SUDEVAN, RESIDING AT ANJALI VIHAR, KARIMPALOOR, PUTHENKULAM PO, KOLLAM-691001. 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. BY ADV M.S.AMAL DHARSAN SRI. M.P. PRASANTH, PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:3:-
ORDER
Dated this the 1st day of February, 2022 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure I complaint in C.C.No.347/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (Temporary) Paravur, Kollam and all further proceedings therein on the ground of settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 5. The 1 st respondent is the defacto complainant.
3. The offence alleged against the petitioners are under Section 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
4. The respondent No.1 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.
5. I have heard Sri. Biju Mathew, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. M.S. Amal Dharsan, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Sri.M.P. Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit -:4:-
sworn in by the respondent No.1 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.
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 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 I. The offence in question do not fall within the category of offences -:5:- 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 further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure I complaint in C.C.No.347/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (Temporary) Paravur, Kollam and all further proceedings therein stands hereby quashed. Sd/- DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp True copy P.A. To Judge -:6:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6556/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure I TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CC NO.347/2019 ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT (TEMPORARY) PARAVUR, KOLLAM. Annexure II TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.12.2020 IN OP(CRL.) NO.166 OF 2020. Annexure III TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.11.2021 IN I.A.NO.1/2021 IN OP(CRL.) NO.166 OF 2020. Annexure IV TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 20.12.2021.