Kerala High Court
Pramod K vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2024
Author: V.G.Arun
Bench: V.G.Arun
Crl.M.C.No.1995 of 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 1995 OF 2024
CRIME NO.72/2021 OF Shornur Police Station, Palakkad
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.59 OF 2024 OF I
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & I ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/S:
PRAMOD K
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O PRABHAKARAN NAIR ,VEMBALATH HOUSE,KAYILIYAD
P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 679122
BY ADV K.P.BALAGOPAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
3 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
BY ADV SIMSAR UL HAQ K.Y
OTHER PRESENT:
PP MAYA M.N.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.1995 of 2024
2
ORDER
Dated this the 11th day of April 2024 The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.72/2021 of Shornur Police Station initially registered for offence under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act. The crime came to be registered on the basis of the information given by the 2nd respondent about the missing of his wife from 07.03.2021 onwards. After investigation, the Police filed final report against the defacto complainant's wife and the petitioner herein, alleging that the wife had eloped with the petitioner after abandoning her son. Hence, the accused were charged with the offences punishable under Sections 75 and 87 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The petitioner has approached this court seeking to quash the proceedings against him based on the settlement arrived at between the petitioner, the defacto complainant and his son, who has now attained majority. Crl.M.C.No.1995 of 2024 3
2. The defacto complainant as well as his son have filed affidavits stating that they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner, the 2nd accused in the crime, and that the proceedings against him can be quashed.
3. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavits, the contents of which are vouched to be true and voluntary by the counsel for respondents 2 and 3, I am satisfied that no public interest is involved in this matter and the dispute has been settled amicably. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, there is no possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure-2 final report and all further proceedings in S.C.No.59 of 2024 on the files of Crl.M.C.No.1995 of 2024 4 the Additional Sessions Court-I, Palakkad as against the petitioner, are quashed.
Sd/-
V.G. Arun Judge vpv