Rajesh vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 4664 Ker

CRL.MC NO. 6404 OF 2021
                                 1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
    FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 2ND VAISAKHA, 1944
                      CRL.MC NO. 6404 OF 2021
    CRIME NO.55/2019 OF Kalikavu Police Station, Malappuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 971/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                      OF FIRST CLASS-I,MANJERI
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

    1     RAJESH, AGED 39 YEARS,
          S/O PARAMESWARAM,
          OLEDATH HOUSE, KURUMBALANGODE, NILAMBUR TALUK,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
          PIN-679334.
          BY ADV K.RAKESH


RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

    1     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.

    2     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KALIKAVU POLICE STATION,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 525

    3     MUSTAFA, S/O ASSAINAR OTTAKKALAM, AGED 45 YEARS,
          PALLAMKODE PO, KALIKAVU VIA, NILAMBUR TALUK,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 525

          BY ADV K.S.PRAVEEN
          SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA-SR.PP


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 6404 OF 2021
                                2




                           ORDER

This Crl.M.C has been instituted to quash Annexure A Final

Report in Crime No.55/2019 of Kalikavu Police Station, on the

ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement in respect of

the subject matter.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused.

3. The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable

under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The 3rd respondent, the defacto complainant, entered

appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn to by him has

also been placed before the Court.

5. Heard Sri.Rakesh K., the learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri.K.S.Praveen, the learned counsel for the 3rd

respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. I have perused the averments in the petition and the

affidavit sworn to by the respondent No.3.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instruction, submitted

that the matter was enquired into through the Investigating

Officer, who has taken a statement of the defacto complainant,

wherein he reported that the disputes between the parties have CRL.MC NO. 6404 OF 2021

been amicably settled. The material placed before the Court

shows that the entire dispute between the parties has been

amicably settled and the defacto complainant has decided not to

proceed further.

8. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108

(SC)], Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and

Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in State of Madhya

Pradesh v. Lakshmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC

688] the Apex Court held that the High Court invoking Section

482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non-

compoundable offences where the parties have settled the

matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under

Section 320 of Cr.P.C if it is warranted in the given facts and

circumstances of the case or to ensure ends of justice or to

prevent abuse of process of any Court.

9. In the instant case, the dispute is purely personal in

nature. There is nothing to show that public interest will be

compromised by quashing the proceedings pursuant to

Annexure A final report. The offence in question does not fall

within the category of serious offences or heinous offences. The

settlement between the parties is found to be voluntary and fair.

The settlement or the compromise satisfies the conscience of the CRL.MC NO. 6404 OF 2021

Court. It is seen that the victim agreed to settle the matter with

his free will.

10. The offence in the present case does not fall within the

category of offences prohibited for granting permission to

compromise in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in

Gian Singh (supra) Narinder Singh (supra) Lakshmi Narayan

(supra).

11. This Court is of the view that no purpose will be served

in proceeding with the matter further.

Resultantly, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure A

Final report in Crime No.55/2019 of Kalikavu Police

Station stands hereby quashed.

Sd/-

K. BABU JUDGE msp CRL.MC NO. 6404 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6404/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.55/2019 OF KALIKAVU POLICE STATION. Annexure b AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED, 5.12.2021.