Dileep vs Pachukutty
2021 Latest Caselaw 12042 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

     FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 26TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                    Crl.MC.No.1017 OF 2021(F)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CP 47/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                   FIRST CLASS -I,THAMARASSERY

     CRIME NO.797/2020 OF KODUVALLY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE


PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 2:

      1      DILEEP
             AGED 25 YEARS
             S/O. DAMODARAN, PILATHOTTATHIL (H), PARAPPAN POYIL,
             THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKODE-673 573

      2      SUBHEESH,
             AGED 46 YEARS
             S/O. VELAYUDHAN, NELLOTTPOYIL (H), PARAPPANPOYIL,
             KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE-673 572

             BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS & STATE:

      1      PACHUKUTTY
             AGED 66 YEARS
             S/O. RARU, RESIDING AT KAYAMAKKILPURAYIL,
             VALIYAPARAMB, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 572

      2      THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
             KODUVALLY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 572

      3      STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031

             R1 BY ADV. SONU AUGUSTINE

OTHER PRESENT:

             SRI RAMESH CHAND-PP

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC.NO.1017 OF 2021(F)

                                 2




                            ORDER

Dated this the 16th day of April 2021

Petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.P

No.47/2020 on the files of Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Thamarassery, arising out of

Crime No.797/2020 of Koduvally Police Station for

having allegedly committed the offences punishable

under Sections 341, 324, 326, 308 and 506 r/w

Section 34 of IPC.

2. The de facto complainant is respondent

No.1 herein, who has appeared through Adv. Sonu

Augustine and has filed an affidavit as Annexure A2

stating that the matter has been amicably settled

and that he has no existing grievance against the

petitioners. The offences alleged are purely personal

in nature and no serious prejudice will be caused to

the public if the settlement is recognised. Further,

possibility of the case ending in conviction is also CRL.MC.NO.1017 OF 2021(F)

very remote, if not impossible due to the said

settlement. Recognising the said settlement augurs

better in the interests of all.

3. Reliance can be placed on the decisions in

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT

108 ], Narinder Singh and Others v. State of

Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and

Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of

Jharkhand [(2014) 9 SCC 653] for recognising the

settlement entered into by the parties.

4. In view of the settlement arrived at

between the petitioners and the 1st respondent, the

petitioners are entitled to get the proceedings

quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. It is also

pertinent to note that the petitioners do not have any

criminal antecedents and no public interest is

involved.

In the result, the Crl.M.C. is allowed and all

proceedings against the petitioners in C.P. CRL.MC.NO.1017 OF 2021(F)

No.47/2020 on the files of Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Thamarassery, arising out of

Crime No.797/2020 shall stand quashed.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

JUDGE NB/16-4 CRL.MC.NO.1017 OF 2021(F)

APPENDIX PETITIONERS'S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.P. NO.

47/2020, ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I, THAMARASSERY.

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE