Praveen Mathew vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 1518 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
  FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 30TH POUSHA, 1944
                    CRL.MC NO. 270 OF 2023
        AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 425/2011 OF
         JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,ALATHUR


PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NOS. 1, 3 & 4:
    1     PRAVEEN MATHEW
          AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. LATE JOSEPH MATHEW,
          CHELLANKOTE HOUSE, MARY LAND,
          VADAKKENCHERI,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678683

    2     THRESSIAMMA
          AGED 70 YEARS, W/O. LATE JOSEPH MATHEW,
          CHELLANKOTE HOUSE, MARY LAND,
          VADAKKENCHERI,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678683

    3     PREETHI MATHEW
          AGED 45 YEARS, W/O. ANIL THOMAS,
          CHELLANKOTE HOUSE, MARY LAND,
          VADAKKENCHERI,
          PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678683

          BY ADVS.
          JACOB SEBASTIAN
          K.V.WINSTON
          ANU JACOB
          DIVYA R. NAIR


RESPONDENTS/ STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 682031
 CRL.MC NO. 270 of 2023

                            -:2:-

    2      VINCY MATHEW
           AGED 40 YEARS, D/O. SEBASTIAN,
           VATTALIL HOUSE, KONNACHAL P.O,
           PANDALUR, NILGIRIS DISTRICT,
           TAMIL NADU., PIN - 643239

           BY ADV K.ABOOBACKER SIDHEEQUE

           SRI.P.G.MANU SR.P.P



     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 20.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 270 of 2023

                                 -:3:-

                              ORDER

Dated this the 20th day of January, 2023

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure-A1 Final

Report in C.C.No.425 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court, Alathur on the ground of settlement between

the parties.

2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4. The

2nd accused is no more. The 2nd 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 2nd respondent entered appearance through

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

5. I have heard Sri.Jacob Sebastian, the learned counsel

for the petitioners, Sri.K.Aboobacker Sidheeque, the learned

counsel for the respondent No.2 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 2nd respondent would show that the entire CRL.MC NO. 270 of 2023

dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the

de facto 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 CRL.MC NO. 270 of 2023

nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected

by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1. 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-A1 Final Report in

C.C.No.425 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court, Alathur hereby stands quashed.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE APA CRL.MC NO. 270 of 2023

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 270/2023

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

Annexure-A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 14.07.2011 IN CRIME NO.442 OF 2011 OF THE VADAKKENCHERI POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

Annexure-A2 ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN INTO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT SIGNED DATED 03.01.2023.