Anandan vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 17302 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
  TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 26TH SRAVANA, 1943
                      CRL.MC NO. 2543 OF 2021
  CRIME NO.343 OF 2021 OF THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

         ANANDAN
         AGED 46 YEARS
         S/O. VARAPPAN, KOLLANNUR THANCHAPPAN HOUSE, ARIMBUR
         DESOM, PARAKKAD, ANTHIKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-
         680 018

             BY ADV ABRAHAM MATHAN



RESPONDENTS/STATE, VICTIM & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

    1        STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
             KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN CODE-682 031.

    2        LAKSHMI PRASAD
             AGED 59 YEARS, KOLLANNUR THANCHAPPAN HOUSE, ARIMBUR
             DESOM, PARAKKAD, ANTHIKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-
             680 018

    3        STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
             THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, PIN-680 001


THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.08.2021,     THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.2543/2021                           2

                                        ORDER

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.343/2021 of Thrissur

Town East Police Station. The crime was registered under Sections 41 (1) (d)

and 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and was subsequently altered to

one under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, following an extra judicial

confession made by the petitioner. It is submitted with reference to

Annexure-2 affidavit that the alleged victim has no complaint against the

petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had robbed a gold

chain belonging to the victim (2nd respondent in this case).

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Public Prosecutor for the State of Kerala and the learned counsel appearing

for the 2nd respondent.

3. With reference to the judgment of this Court in

Crl.M.C.No.5886/2016, the judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand in

W.P.(Crl)No.314/2018 and to the judgment of this Court in

Crl.M.C.No.2057/2014, it is submitted that even an offence under Section

392 of the Indian Penal Code can be quashed in exercise of the jurisdiction

vested in this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of

Punjab [2012 (10) SCC 303] and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai

Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and

another [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that considering the facts and

circumstances of a case, where the High Court is satisfied that an amicable

settlement has been arrived between the parties and the offence is not

serious in nature involving mental depravity etc., criminal proceedings may

be quashed, in order to secure the ends of justice.

5. Considering the nature of the offence and keeping in mind the

principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the decisions referred to above,

I am of the opinion that this is a fit case where the inherent jurisdiction of

this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be

invoked to quash the proceedings. Apparently, no public interest is involved.

The chances of a successful prosecution are also remote. It will be a wastage

of judicial time to continue with the prosecution against the petitioner.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-I FIR and all further

proceedings in Crime No.343/2021 of Thrissur Town Police Station will

stand quashed as against the petitioner.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE acd

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2543/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 343 OF 2021 OF THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION DATED 16.03.202.

ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29.04.2021.