Kerala High Court
Prasanth vs State Of Kerala on 11 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 22ND MAGHA,1942
Crl.MC.No.5483 OF 2020(E)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 773/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD
CRIME NO.259/2017 OF Mankara Police Station , Palakkad
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 4:
1 PRASANTH
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.PRABHAKARAN, KIZHAKKUMPURAM HOUSE, KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
2 ANU,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. NARAYANAN, VELAMBARA HOUSE, KINAVALLOOR, PARALI,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
3 SREEKUTTAN,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O. SUKUMARAN, KALLAMBARAMBU HOUSE, KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
4 VISHNU,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O.VIJAYAN, KIZHAKKUMPURAM HOUSE, KINAVALLOOR,
PARALI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENT/STATE AND :
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2 SARADA
AGED 57 YEARS
W/O.VIJAYA LAKSHMANAN, THALAPOTTA HOUSE,
KALLAMPARAMBU, KINAVALLOOR, PARALI P.O., PALAKKAD
DISTRICT, PIN-678612..
R2 BY ADV. BABU JOSE
PP AJITH MURALI
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.5483 OF 2020(E) ..2..
ORDER
Dated this the 11th day of February 2021
Petitioners are the accused in Crime
No.259/2017 registered at the Mankara Police Station
for offences punishable under Sections 447, 323, 354
and 294(b) r/w 34 of IPC, now pending as
C.C.No.773/2017 on the files of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad. The de facto
complainant, at whose instance the crime was
registered, is arrayed as the 2 nd respondent.
Annexure-B affidavit has been filed by 2 nd respondent
stating that the dispute, which was the reason for the
incident and registration of the crime, has been
resolved amicably and she has no subsisting
grievance against the petitioners.
2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,
Crl.MC.No.5483 OF 2020(E) ..3..
who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners
have no criminal antecedents.
3. Having considered the gravity of the offences
alleged, nature of the injury caused and having
perused the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, the
contents of which are submitted to be true and
voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and
no public interest is involved in this matter.
Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the
criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote.
As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount
to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of
the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme
Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab
[(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is
no impediment in granting the relief sought.
Crl.MC.No.5483 OF 2020(E) ..4..
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The
proceedings in C.C.No.773/2017 on the files of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad is
quashed.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
SB/11/02/2021 JUDGE
Crl.MC.No.5483 OF 2020(E) ..5..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.259/2017 OF MANKARA POLICE
STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT DATED
25.7.2017.
ANNEXURE B THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN
TO BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 BEFORE HER
ADVOCATE AT PALAKKAD, DATED
28.11.2020.
//true copy// P.A to Judge
