Asgar Gullukhan vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 12237 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
 THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 1ST POUSHA, 1944
                      CRL.MC NO. 9156 OF 2022
          AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 3293/2021 OF
        JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,NEDUMANGAD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
          ASGAR GULLUKHAN
          AGED 37 YEARS,
          S/O HABEEB GULLUKHAN, 16 - 17 G,
          OAK N LEAF, HEERA SWISS TOWN,
          SASTHAMANGALAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 690030
            BY ADVS.
            ARUN CHAND
            VINAYAK G MENON
            BHARAT VIJAY P.
            THAREEQ ANVER K.
            K.SALMA JENNATH
            MINU VITTORRIA PAULSON
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
    2       SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
            VATTIYOORKAVU POLICE STATION,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM , PIN - 695013
    3       NIJITHA R. SHUKKOOR
            AGED 35 YEARS
            S/O ABDUL SHUKKOOR AND S. RAMIZA,
            PERMANENT RESIDENT OF "JISHIMI",
            MARUTHANKUZHY, KANJIRAMPARA P.O.,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695030
            BY ADV SAREENA.S

            SRI P G MANU-SR PP

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 9156 of 2022

                                  -:2:-

                               ORDER

Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2022

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure-A2 Final

Report in C.C.No.3293 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial First

Class Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangad, Thiruvananthapuram on

the ground of settlement between the parties.

2. The petitioner is the accused. The 3rd respondent is the

de facto complainant.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioner 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.Arun Chand, the learned counsel for

the petitioner, Smt.Sareena.S., 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. 9156 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. 9156 of 2022

by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2. 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-A2 Final Report in

C.C.No.3293 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangad, Thiruvananthapuram hereby

stands quashed.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE APA CRL.MC NO. 9156 of 2022

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 9156/2022

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.

290/2020 OF VATTIYOORKAVU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 290/2020 OF VATTIYOORKAVU POLICE STATION SUBMITTED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER WHICH IS NOW PENDING AS C.C. NO.3293/2021 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - II, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Annexure A3 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT SETTLING ALL THE DISPUTES WITH THE PETITIONER HEREIN PURSUANT TO ANNEXURE A1 CRIME AND A2 FINAL REPORT.