Kerala High Court
Rayees 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. 245 OF 2024
CRIME NO.924/2023 OF Thaliparamba Police Station, Kannur
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.1 AND 2:
1 RAYEES
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O FAYIS, SEKKALI HOUSE, COCHIPALLI,KANNUR CITY, NOW
RESIDING AT DARUL AMAN QUARTERS KAKKAD ,KANNUR, PIN -
670005.
2 RAMLATH
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O FAYIS, SEKKALI HOUSE, COCHIPALLI,KANNUR CITY, NOW
RESIDING AT DARUL AMAN QUARTERS KAKKAD ,KANNUR, PIN -
670005.
BY ADV M.ANUROOP
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031.
2 MAJIDA. K
AGED 23 YEARS
D/O. THAJUDHEEN, MAJIDA MANZIL, NR. MADRASSA, SERVICE
STATION ROAD, THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR RURAL, PIN - 670141.
SRI.G.P SUDHEER, PP
SRI.MURSHID ALI. M
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. 245 OF 2024 2
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused persons in Crime No.924 of 2023 of the Taliparamba Police Station, Kannur. The offence alleged are under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.
2. The petitioners seek to quash Annexure A1 FIR in the said crime and all further proceedings thereto against the petitioners, on the premise that the disputes between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant have been settled amicably and that the de facto complainant is not any more interested to prosecute the matter. Along with the Crl.M.C, Annexure A2 affidavit was sworn to by the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, where she would state that the disputes had been settled amicably and that she has no surviving grievance against the petitioners. The deponent would also state that she has no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.
3. When this case was moved, this Court CRL.MC NO. 245 OF 2024 3 directed the learned Public Prosecutor to get instructions, along with a signed statement of the de facto complainant. The same is also made available. In the signed statement of the de facto complainant also, she would reiterate her stand in Annexure A2 affidavit.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and Sri.Murshid Ali. M, the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant/2nd respondent.
5. In view of the judgments of 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 petitioners, inasmuch as the defacto complainant had unequivocally expressed her intention to withdraw the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. The issues involved in this crime are purely private in nature, without in any way impacting the society at large. CRL.MC NO. 245 OF 2024 4
In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C is allowed and Annexure A1 FIR and all further proceedings pursuant to Crime No.924 of 2023 of Taliparamba Police Station, Kannur, as against the petitioners are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE Sru CRL.MC NO. 245 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 245/2024 PETITIONERS ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 924/2023 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION DATED 09-06- 2023.
Annexure A2 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 10-12-2023 SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.