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 6, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Sumesh vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2022

Author: Kauser Edappagath

Bench: Kauser Edappagath

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
     FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                     CRL.MC NO. 5782 OF 2020
CRIME NO.733/2017 OF Kilimanoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram
 CC 2016/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III,ATTINGAL
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

    1     SUMESH, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. JANARDHANA KURUP, OJAS
          BHAVAN, POYIKKADA DESOM, NAGAROOR VILLAGE, KILIMANOOR,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

    2     OMANA AMMA, AGED 68 YEARS, D/O. CHELLAMMA, OJAS BHAVAN,
          POYIKKADA DESOM, NAGAROOR VILLAGE, KILIMANOOR,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

          BY ADV M.DINESH


RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

    1     STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
          COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.

    2     ANJALI S. NAIR, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O. KAMALA, ANJALI
          NIVAS, KADUVAYIL KATTUMPURAM, ATTINGAL P. O., ATTINGAL,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695101.

          BY ADV C.S.SUMESH

          SRI. P.G. MANU, SR. PP


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.5782/2020

                                -:2:-



                              ORDER

Dated this the 10th day of June, 2022 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in C.C.No. 2016/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Attingal on the ground of settlement between the parties.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 and 2. The 2 nd espondent is the defacto complainant.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498A and 34 of IPC.

4. The respondent No.2 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

5. I have heard Sri. Dinesh M., the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. C.S. Sumesh, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri.P.G. Manu, the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire Crl.M.C.No.5782/2020 -:3:- dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings 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 by 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 the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.

8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in Crl.M.C.No.5782/2020 -:4:- nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2. 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 any further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A2 Final Report in C.C.No. 2016/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Attingal hereby stands quashed.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE kp Crl.M.C.No.5782/2020 -:5:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5782/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.733/2017 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.2016/2017 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -II, ATTINGAL WHICH ARISE FROM CRIME NO.733/2017 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPROMISE ENTERED BY THE PETITIONERS AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN O.P.NO.657/2017 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, ATTINGAL.

ANNEXURE A4 ORIGINAL OF JOINT AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.11.2020.