Muhammed Musthafa vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 11885 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022/30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                    CRL.MC NO. 8236 OF 2022
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 193/2021 OF JUDICIAL
             MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , PATTAMBI
PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 5:

     1    MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA
          AGED 32 YEARS
          S/O.LATE IBRAHIM,
          CHERUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
          VILATHUR POST, KOPPAM,
          PATTAMBI TALUK,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 679304

     2    KHADEEJA
          AGED 62 YEARS, W/O.LATE IBRAHIM,
          CHERUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
          VILATHUR POST, KOPPAM,
          PATTAMBI TALUK,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 679304

     3    SEENATHUL LAILA
          AGED 37 YEARS, D/O. LATE IBRAHIM,
          CHERUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
          VILATHUR POST, KOPPAM,
          PATTAMBI TALUK,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT,, PIN - 679304

     4    RAIHANATH
          AGED 40 YEARS, D/O. LATE IBRAHIM AND
          W/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KARIPPAYI HOUSE,
          KADAMBUZHA POST,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 676553

     5    FATHIMA SUHARA
          AGED 37 YEARS, D/O. LATE IBRAHIM,
          CHERUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
          VILATHUR POST, KOPPAM,
          PATTAMBI TALUK,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 679304

          BY ADV R.SREEHARI
 CRL.MC NO. 8236 of 2022

                            -:2:-

RESPONDENTS/ STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

    1      STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA , COCHIN ., PIN - 682031

    2      STATION HOUSE OFFICER
           KOPPAM POLICE STATION,
           KOPPAM POST, PATTAMBI TALUK,
           PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 679307

    3      RAMSEENA
           AGED 27 YEARS, W/O.MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA AND
           D/O.ABDUL KHADER,
           CHERUMKUZHIYIL HOUSE, VILATHUR POST,
           KOPPAM, PATTAMBI TALUK,
           PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 679304

           BY ADV K.RAJESH SUKUMARAN

           SRI P G MANU-SR PP



     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 21.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 8236 of 2022

                                  -:3:-

                               ORDER

Dated this the 21st day of December, 2022

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure-2 Final

Report in C.C.No.193/2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court, Pattambi on the ground of settlement between

the parties.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 5. The 3rd

respondent is the de facto complainant.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are

punishable under Sections 498-A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.

4. The 3rd respondent entered appearance through

counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

5. I have heard Sri.R.Sreehari, the learned counsel for the

petitioners, Shri.K.Rajesh Sukumaran, the learned counsel for the

respondent No.3 and Sri.P.G.Manu, the learned Senior Public

Prosecutor.

6. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit

sworn in by the 3rd respondent would show that the entire dispute

between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto CRL.MC NO. 8236 of 2022

complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal

proceedings further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction,

submits that the matter was enquired into through the

investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant

was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was

amicably settled.

7. The Apex Court 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. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5

SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C

can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable

offence where the parties have settled the matter between

themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is

warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to

ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any

Court.

8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in

nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected CRL.MC NO. 8236 of 2022

by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure-2. The

offences in question does not fall within the category of offences

prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the

Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and

Laxmi Narayan (supra).

For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no

purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further.

Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-2 Final Report in

C.C.No.193/2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate

Court, Pattambi hereby stands quashed.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE APA CRL.MC NO. 8236 of 2022

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8236/2022

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ALONG WITH FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT IN CRIME NO.53/2021 OF KOPPAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, DATED 04/03/2021

Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED IN CRIME NO.53/2021, OF KOPPAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT , PATTAMBI DATED 10/03/2021

Annexure 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 53/2021, OF KOPPAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PATTAMBI

Annexure 4 AN AFFIDAVIT IN ORIGINAL DULY SWORNED AND SIGNED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12/11/2022