Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 3588 OF 2021 CRIME NO.321/2021 OF VADANAPPALLY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR RURAL PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2: 1 SINEESH, AGED 27 YEARS PONATH HOUSE, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, KODUNGALLUR, VADANAPPALLY, THRISSUR RURAL. 2 PUSHPA, AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.SUBRAMANIAN PONATH HOSUE, KODUNGALLUR, VADANAPPALLY, THRISSUR RURAL. BY ADVS. N.C.RAJESH ANJANA KANNATH HARITHA JAYAN RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VADANAPPALLY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 614. 3 JITHA, AGED 24 YEARS D/O.BALU, KUNJATHAN HOUSE, VADANAPPALLY, THRISSUR RURAL-680 615. R1 AND R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. C. SEENA R3 BY ADV AMMU ANIL THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Crl.M.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings pursuant to Annexure A1 - FIR in crime No.321/2021 of Vadanappally Police Station, which is registered for the offences u/s.354, 468, 509 and 506 IPC and 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
2. The petitioners are the accused persons in the above
crime. It is alleged that the 1st petitioner threatened the 3rd respondent using her morphed photographs and forcefully took her in his car and touched her breast and later on 8.4.2021 at about 8.45 a.m the 1st petitioner rushed towards the shop of the father of the 3rd respondent and threatened him that he will circulate the photographs. Later, 2nd petitioner, mother of the 1st petitioner threatened the mother of the 3rd respondent that if 1st petitioner marries her daughter she will kill her and thereby committed the offences aforementioned. Annexure A1 is the copy of FIR. Annexure A2 is the affidavit duly sworn in by the 3 rd respondent - defacto complainant.
3. Adv. Ammu Anil, appeared on behalf of the 3rd respondent - defacto complainant.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the defacto complainant was contacted over phone and she agreed with the averments in the Annexure A2 affidavit.
5. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another
(2012 (10) SCC 303 : 2012 KHC 4530) a three Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has held that criminal cases having civil flavour and arising from criminal financial merchantile, civil, partnership, matrimony relating to dowry or family disputes where wrong is private or personal in nature can be quashed in view of the settlement between the parties.
6. Anneuxre-A2 affidavit sworn in by the defacto complainant would specifically state that there was some
misunderstanding occurred in their relationship and they separated mentally. Both accused are distant relative of the defacto complainant and the case was filed under a
misconception and now she had no intention to proceed against the petitioners and the matter has been amicably settled among them. It is also stated that she has no objection in quashing the entire proceedings in Annexure-A1 FIR. Since the parties have already settled the matter amicably, there is no purpose in continuing the proceedings. No public interest is involved and the issue is purely private in nature. So there is no impediment in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners and further continuance of the proceedings against the petitioners also will be an abuse of process of law. Therefore, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to quash the entire proceedings in Annexure A1 - FIR in crime No.321/2021 of Vadanappally Police Station. It is ordered accordingly.
Crl.M.C. stands allowed. Sd/- M.R.ANITHA shg JUDGE APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3588/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURE Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.321/2021 OF VADANAPALLY POLICE STATION DATED 07.05.2021. Annexure A2 AFFIDAVIT DATED 23.07.2021 EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.