Kerala High Court
Venugopal vs Nil on 15 January, 2013
Author: T.R.Ramachandran Nair
Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/25TH POUSHA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 3924 of 2012 ()
--------------------------
CC.360/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, OTTAPPALAM
-------------------
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :
------------------------------------
VENUGOPAL,
S/O SIVASANKARAN, AGED 43 YEARS,
NARAYANAMANGALM, THACHANPARA
MANNARAKAD, PALAKKAD.
BY ADV. SRI. S. MOHAMMED AL RAFI
RESPONDNETS/COMPLAINANT :
------------------------------------------------
1. SATHYAVATHY,
W/O BABU, AGED 38 YEARS,
VEENA MANDIRAM, VIJAYA NAGAR
PATTATHANAM, KOLLAM.
2. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.VISHNU
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. VIJU THOMAS
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-01-2013,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
Crl.MC.No. 3924 of 2012 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
ANNEXURE A: CERTIFIED COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME
NO.35/12 OF RAILWAY POLICE STATION, SHORNUR.
ANNEXURE B: CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.35/12 OF
RAILWAY POLICE STATION, SHORNUR.
ANNEXURE C: AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
Mn
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl. M.C.No. 3924 of 2012
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF JANUARY, 2013
O R D E R
The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C. No.360/2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court's, Ottappalam wherein the offence alleged is punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. The first respondent is the defacto complainant. The allegation, according to the petitioner, is that while he was travelling in Trivandrum-Chennai Superfast Train, his hand accidentally and inadvertently touched the body of the defacto complainant who was travelling in the same train.
2. It is now submitted that the incident occurred accidentally and inadvertently. It is also stated that the disputes between the parties are of purely personal in nature and the same has been amicably settled. Annexure C is the affidavit sworn to by the first respondent wherein it is stated that the crime was registered on the basis of misunderstanding and she has no subsisting grievance against the accused/petitioner. It is also stated that since the disputes are amicably settled, she does not wish to continue any prosecution proceedings against him and that she has no objection against quashing the proceedings and final report in the crime against the accused. Crl.M.C.No.3924/2012/2013 -2-
3. In the light of the settlement between the parties and also in the light of the filing of affidavit by the defacto complainant, I am satisfied that this is a fit case in which the power of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised, in view of the legal position explained by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshy v. State of Haryana and another (2003 (2) KLT 1062- SC) and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012 (4) KLT 108 - SC).
Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. The proceedings pending against the petitioner in C.C. No.360/2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ottappalam will stand quashed. No costs.
(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) kav/