Kerala High Court
Haroon Dilshad vs State Of Kerala on 24 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 550 OF 2023
CRIME NO.1179/2019 OF Mattancherry Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 760/2020 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, MATTANCHERY
PETITIONER/ACCUSED (A3):
HAROON DILSHAD
AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. DILSHAD P.U,
22/2363, VALUMAL ROAD, THOPPUMPADY, ERNAKULAM - 682005.
BY ADVS.
K.S.ARUN KUMAR
SAQIB RIZWAN
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA - 682031.
2 MUHAMMEDKUNJU @ JAFFER
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O MOIDEENKUNJU, S P HOUSE, PALLATHUM MOOLAYIL,
NAKARAJ VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARGOD DISTRICT- 671551
BY ADV MOHAMMED SIYAD M F - RESP.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No.550 of 2023
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
====================
Crl.M.C. No.550 of 2023
=====================
Dated this the 24th day of March, 2023
ORDER
Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C
to quash all proceedings against him.
2. Petitioner is the 3 rd accused in Crime No.1179/2019 of
Mattancherry Police Station, now pending as CC.No.760/2020 on the
files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Mattanchery,
registered for the offences under Sections 392 and 506(i) read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2nd respondent is the
defacto complainant.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the
petitioner ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that,
considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be
served by continuing the proceedings.
5. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10
SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High
Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between
Crl.M.C. No.550 of 2023
the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal
proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and
Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and
Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and
Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].
6. I have perused Annexure 2 affidavit filed by the 2 nd
respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon
verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the
defacto complainant stands by the contents thereof. I am satisfied
that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in
this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for
quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an
exercise in futility.
7. Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner in
CC.No.760/2020 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class
Court, Mattanchery, are quashed.
This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
jm JUDGE
Crl.M.C. No.550 of 2023
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 550/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1
A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO. 1179/2019 OF MATTANCHERRY POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
Annexure 2 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
