Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Abdu Samad vs the State of Kerala

Abdu Samad vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 31, 2019
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1859596

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.MC/933/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abdu Samad

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....(pocso) act, 2012, which has led to the institution of anx-b final report in s.c. no.654/2017 on the files of the additional district court-ii, manjeri. it is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent defacto complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2 nd respondent has sworn to anx.c affidavit before this court, wherein it is stated that she has settled the entire disputes with the petitioner and that she has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner. it is in the light of these aspects that the petitioner has preferred the instant crl.m.c. with the prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against him.2. in a catena of decisions, the apex court has held that, in appropriatecases involving even non-compoundable offences, the high court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under sec.482 of the cr.p.c., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. here, this court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such acrl.mc.no.933 of 2019(f) 3situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. on a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the apex court in the cases as in gian singh v. stateof punjab reported in 2013 (1) scc (cri) 160 = (2012) 10 scc 303 and narinder singh and others v. state of punjab and anr. reported in(2014) 6 scc 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.3. accordingly, it is ordered in the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 9TH KARTHIKA, 1941 Crl.MC.No.933 OF 2019(F) CRIME NO.510/2016 OF Kottakkal Police Station , Malappuram PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ABDU SAMAD AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ABDUL MAJEED, MACHINGAL HOUSE, PUTHUPARAMBU P.O, THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.RANJITH (MANJERI) RESPONDENTS/STATE , DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031 -FOR THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WANDOOR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 328 2 SUBAIDA W/O. MUHAMED ASHARAF, AGED 46 YEARS, KALLANGATTU KUZHIYIL HOUSE, PUTHOOR P.O, KOTTAKKAL, THIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 503 R2 BY ADV. A.P.NIDHIN KUMAR

OTHER PRESENT: SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No.933 OF 2019(F) 2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

================= Crl.M.C. No.933 of 2019 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of October, 2019

ORDER

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in the impugned Anx-A FIR in Crime No.510/2016 of Kottakal Police Station, Malappuram district, registered

for offences punishable under Sec. 363 of the IPC and Secs.7 & 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, which has led to the institution of Anx-B Final Report in S.C. No.654/2017 on the files of the Additional District Court-II, Manjeri. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent defacto complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2 nd respondent has sworn to Anx.C affidavit before this Court, wherein it is stated that she has settled the entire disputes with the petitioner and that she has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioner has preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with the prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against him.

2. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate

cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such a

Crl.MC.No.933 OF 2019(F) 3

situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in Gian Singh v. State

of Punjab reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr. reported in

(2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

3. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the impugned

Anx-A FIR in Crime No.510/2016 of Kottakal Police Station, Malappuram district, which has led to the institution of Anx-B Final Report in S.C. No.654/2017 on the files of the Additional District Court-II, Manjeri, and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against accused will stand quashed. The petitioner will produce certified copies of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below concerned. Office of Advocate General will forward copy of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information.

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of. Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE SKS Crl.MC.No.933 OF 2019(F) 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R ALONG WITH FIS IN CRIME NO. 510/2016 OF THE KOTTAKKAL POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial