Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 10987 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2021
Crl.M.C.5461/2020
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1943
Crl.MC.No.5461 OF 2020(C)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 2546/2017 OF JMFC - VIII,
ERNAKULAM (TEMPORARY)
CRIME NO.880/2017 OF Panangad Police Station, Ernakulam
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:
1 VIBIN THAMBI, AGED 39 YEARS
S/O SREENIVASAN, PARAYIL HOUSE,
NETTOOR, MARADU, KUMBALAM, PANAGADU,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682040.
2 LEELA, AGED 61 YEARS,
W/O SREENIVASAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, NETTOOR,
MARADY, KUMBALAM,
ERNAKUKAM DISTRICT, PIN-682040.
BY ADV. SRI.P.A.ABHILASH
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.
2 SINDHU
AGED 34 YEARS
W/O VIBIN THAMBI,
CHERPPIL HOUSE, PUTHOOR P O,
TRISSUR-680014.
R2 BY ADV. BOBBY K.PAUL
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.C.N. PRABHAKARAN,SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.5461/2020
2
ORDER
Dated this the 7th day of April 2021
Petition under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and
2 in Crime No. 880 of 2017 of Panangad Police
Station registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 323, 324, 341, 294(b), 498A read
with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, now pending
as C.C. No. 2546 of 2017 on the file of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-VIII,
Ernakulam.
3. Heard both sides and perused the
records.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel
for the petitioners that the parties have resolved
the entire dispute among themselves and there is no
subsisting dispute between them. Now the 1st Crl.M.C.5461/2020
petitioner and the defacto complainant are living
together. Therefore, this petition to quash
Annexure A2 final report.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd
respondent/defacto complainant has submitted that
she has absolutely no grievance or complaint
against the petitioners. Annexure A4, the affidavit
sworn to by her, indicates that she has no
intention to pursue the matter further.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor has
reported that the prosecution has no serious
objection in allowing the petition.
7. As the dispute has been amicably
settled, the possibility of conviction is remote
and bleak.
8. Therefore, considering the special
facts and circumstances involved in this case,
I find that no fruitful purpose is likely to be
served by proceeding with the matter against the
petitioners. Moreover, no public interest is Crl.M.C.5461/2020
involved in the case and there is no legal
impediment in granting the prayer as sought for by
the petitioners. Therefore, for the purpose of
securing the ends of justice, this Crl.M.C. is only
to be allowed.
For the foregoing reasons, Annexure A2
final report in Crime No.880 of 2017 of Panangad
Police Station now pending as C.C. No. 2546 of 2017
on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate
Court-VIII, Ernakulam will stand quashed as prayed
for.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V.
JUDGE
sb Crl.M.C.5461/2020
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE-A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.880/2017 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-A2 THE ACCUSED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.880/2017.
ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DATED 10/12/18 MADE BEFORE THE MEDIATION CENTRE AT FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.
ANNEXURE-A4 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 22.11.2020.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!