Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sujith vs Diya Ajayan on 10 February, 2022

Author: Kauser Edappagath

Bench: Kauser Edappagath

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
      THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022/ 21ST MAGHA, 1943
                   CRL.MC NO. 4656 OF 2021
   CP 7/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,
                               KANNUR
            Crime No.5/2021 of Kannur Vanitha Police Station
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.1 TO 3:
    1    SUJITH
         AGED 27 YEARS
         S/O. KUNJUKUTTAN, PALLIPATTIL HOUSE,
         SANKARAMANGALAM, PATTAMBI,
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679303.
    2    MUHAMMED ARSHAD C.,
         AGED 23 YEARS
         S/O.HAMZA, CHOLAYIL HOUSE, SANKARAMANGALAM,
         PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679303.
    3    PRANAV A.P.,
         AGED 26 YEARS
         S/O. NARAYANAN, AMMUKUNNATHPADI HOUSE,
         SANKARAMANGALAM, PATTAMBI,
         PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679303.
         BY ADVS.
         SANTHARAM.P
         REKHA ARAVIND
         P.G.GOKULNATH
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
    1    DIYA AJAYAN
         AGED 20 YEARS
         D/O. AJAYAN T.P., THEKKETHALA PARAMBIL HOUSE,
         CHERIYAMANGAD, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE-673305.
    2    STATE OF KERALA,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
         HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31.
           R1 BY ADV ANOOP JOSEPH
          R2 BY SRI M P PRASANTH- Public Prosecutor
     THIS   CRIMINAL      MISC.     CASE     HAVING     COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.4656 of 2021


                               ..2..




                            ORDER

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure 2 Final Report in Crime No.5/2021 of Kannur Vanitha Police Station on the ground of settlement between the parties.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 3. The 1 st respondent is the de facto complainant.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 354, 511, 366 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

4. The respondent No.1 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

5. I have heard Sri.Santharam.P., the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Anoop Joseph, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Sri.M.P.Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.2.

6. The averments in the petition as well as in the affidavit 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 Crl.M.C.No.4656 of 2021 ..3..

the crime 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 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 2 Final Report in Crime No.5/2021 of Kannur Vanitha Police Crl.M.C.No.4656 of 2021 ..4..

Station. 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 further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure 2 Final Report in Crime No.5/2021 of Kannur Vanitha Police Station stands hereby quashed.

Sd/-

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE skj Crl.M.C.No.4656 of 2021 ..5..

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4656/2021 PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.5/2021 OF KANNUR VANITHA POLICE. Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.5/2021 OF KANNUR VANITHA POLICE.

Annexure 3 A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FILED BY 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.9.2021.

Annexure 4 CERTIFIED COPY OF 164 STATEMENT GIVEN BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KANNUR.