Madhu vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 4453 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
     TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1944
                        CRL.MC NO. 1047 OF 2022
        CRIME NO.716/2015 OF Mankara Police Station, Palakkad
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 874/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                      OF FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/S:

            MADHU
            AGED 29 YEARS
            SON OF KANNAN,
            HEMAMBIKA NAGAR,
            NEAR AYYAPPA TEMPLE,
            KELLAKKULANGARA, OLAVAKKODE,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678009

            BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW


RESPONDENT/S:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA
            ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
    2       HABEESH
            AGED 43 YEARS
            SON OF VEERAN SAHIB,
            KOTTAKUNNU HOUSE, PERUPARAMBU,
            PERUR POST, PATHIRIPALA, LAKKIDI,
            OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679302

            BY SRI. PRASANTH M.P.,   PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 1047 OF 2022
                                    -2-

                                ORDER

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.716/2015 of Mankara

Police Station, Palakkad District, and the offences alleged against the

petitioner are under Sections 454, 380 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

2. The allegation is that on the first week of August 2015, the

accused along with two other juveniles in conflict of law has

committed theft of a Tablet of HCL Company from the table of the

defacto complainant's shop, when nobody was present, which was

open.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the second

respondent.

4. It is submitted by respective counsel that the petitioner and the

second respondent have arrived at an amicable settlement and

Annexure A3 is the affidavit filed. The affidavit, inter alia, state that all

the disputes are settled and that the pendency of criminal proceeding

would cause hardship to all the parties. CRL.MC NO. 1047 OF 2022

5. From the submission across the Bar and perusing the criminal

M.C. and the affidavit referred above, I am satisfied that there has

been an amicable settlement and that there is no vitiating

circumstances in the respondent filing the affidavit. No purpose will

be served by continuing the proceedings in the above circumstances.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the statement of

the defacto complainant has also be taken to verify the genuineness of

the settlement.

6. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [2012 (10) SCC

303] and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in

exercise of power of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, I hereby quash Annexure A1 Final Report and all

further proceedings in C.C.No.874 of 2016 on the files of the Judicial

First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad in Crime No.716 of 2015 of

Mankara Police Station against this petitioner.

The Crl.MC is allowed as above.

Sd/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

JUDGE uu/12.04.2022 CRL.MC NO. 1047 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1047/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 13.08.2016.

Annexure2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE.

Annexure3 AFFIDAVIT DATED 28.10.2019 EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT