Sulfiker vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 461 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
    THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 23RD POUSHA, 1943
                     CRL.MC NO. 6374 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1669/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                   OF FIRST CLASS , KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1-2:
     1     SULFIKER
           AGED 40 YEARS
           S/O. SHAMSUDHEEN, KUTTETH KIZHAKKATHIL, ERUVA
           PADINJARU, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE.
    2     KUNJUMUTHU
          AGED 48 YEARS
          W/O SHAMSUDHEEN, KUTTETH KIZHAKKATHIL, ERUVA PADINJARU,
          PATHIYOOR VILLAGE.
    3     SHINI
          AGED 32 YEARS
          W/O. SHIHABUDHEEN, KUTTETH KIZHAKKATHIL, ERUVA
          PADINJARU, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE.
    4     HIDAYATHULLAH
          AGED 33 YEARS
          S/O. SHAMSUDHEEN, KUTTETH KIZHAKKATHIL, ERUVA
          PADINJARU, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE.
          BY ADV M.R.SASITH

RESPONDENT/S:
     1     STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
           KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.
    2     SHAHEENA
          AGED 21 YEARS
          D/O. SHAJI, KANNAMATH PADEETATHIL, MULLAKKERI MURI,
          PANMANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 583.
    3     THE SUB INSPECTOR
          KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, PIN-690 502.
          BY ADV RANJITH E N


          SRI M P PRASANTH-PP
    THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                                   2
Crl.M.C No.6374 of 2021



                             ORDER

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

Final Report in Crime No. 1196 of 2020 of Kayamkulam Police

Stgation in C.C. No.1669 of 2020 of Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-1 on the ground of settlement between the

parties.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 4. The 2 nd

respondent is the de-facto complainant.

3. The offence alleged against the petitioners are under

Sections 498(A), 323,294(b), 506(1) and Section 34 of IPC.

4. The respondent No.2 entered appearance through

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

5. I have heard Advs. Sri. M.R. Sasith learned counsel

for the petitioner, Sri. Ranjith E.N the learned counsel for the

respondent and Sri. M.P.Prasanth the learned Public Prosecutor.

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

sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire

dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the

de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the crime

Crl.M.C No.6374 of 2021

further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the

matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a

statement of the father of the de facto complainant (CW2) was

also recorded wherein he 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 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 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

by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2. The

offences in question do not fall within the category of offences

Crl.M.C No.6374 of 2021

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 further.

Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A2 Final Report in

C.C. No.1669 of 2020 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1

stands hereby quashed.

Sd/-

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE rpk

Crl.M.C No.6374 of 2021

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6374/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.1196/2020 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA. Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1196/2020 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA.

Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.