Kerala High Court
Jinil Jude vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 2526 OF 2024
CRIME NO.19/2024 OF Ernakulam Central Police Station, Ernakulam
CC NO.352 OF 2024 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,
ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
JINIL JUDE
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O JUDAPPAN, VADAKKEKANDATHIL PARAMBU HOUSE, VADUTHALA
JETTY P.O, AROOKKUTY VILLAGE ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688535.
BY ADVS.
RAFEEK. V.K.
A.LIJIMON
U.M.HASSAN
SALMAN FARIS
NISHNA P.T.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031.
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
ERNAKUAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 691306.
3 LINET GEORGE
D/O GEORGE JOSEPH, VADAKKEKKUTT HOUSE, ALAKKOTE
VILLAGE, THALIPPARAMBU, KANNUR, PIN - 670571.
SRI.E.C BINEESH, PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 2526 OF 2024 2
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.19 of 2024 of the Central Police Station, Ernakulam, wherein the offences alleged are under Sections 354 and 354(D) of the Indian Penal Code. Based on Annexure A1 Final Report, C.C No.352 of 2024 is pending consideration before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - II, Ernakulam.
2. The petitioner seeks to quash Annexure A1 Final Report in the Calendar Case above referred, on the premise that the disputes between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent/de facto complainant have been settled amicably by and between them and the 3rd respondent is not any more interested to prosecute the case against the petitioner. Along with the Crl.M.C, the petitioner produced Annexure A2 affidavit, wherein the de facto complainant would endorse that the disputes have been settled between herself and the petitioner and she has no surviving grievance against him. The deponent would also state that CRL.MC NO. 2526 OF 2024 3 she is not interested to prosecute the matter any more and therefore, she has no objection in quashing the Final Report in the crime above referred.
3. When this matter was moved, the learned Prosecutor was directed to get instructions along with a signed statement of the de facto complainant. The same is made available, a perusal of which would reiterate that the matter has been settled and the de facto complainant is not interested to prosecute the case any more.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. In view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi & Ors vs State Of Haryana & Anr [2003 (4) SCC 675] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], this Court finds that no useful purpose is to be served by continuing the prosecution as against the petitioner, inasmuch as the defacto complainant had unequivocally expressed her intention to withdraw CRL.MC NO. 2526 OF 2024 4 the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The issues involved in this crime are private in nature, without impacting the society at large.
In the circumstances,this Crl.M.C is allowed and Annexure A1 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C No.352 of 2024 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - II, Ernakulam are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE Sru CRL.MC NO. 2526 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2526/2024 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN C.C.352/2024 WITH FIR ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DATED 28-02-2024 FURNISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.