Kerala High Court
Pramod K vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2024
Author: V.G.Arun
Bench: V.G.Arun
Crl.M.C.No.1995 of 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 1995 OF 2024
CRIME NO.72/2021 OF Shornur Police Station, Palakkad
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.59 OF 2024 OF I
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & I ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/S:
PRAMOD K
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O PRABHAKARAN NAIR ,VEMBALATH HOUSE,KAYILIYAD
P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 679122
BY ADV K.P.BALAGOPAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
3 XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
BY ADV SIMSAR UL HAQ K.Y
OTHER PRESENT:
PP MAYA M.N.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.1995 of 2024
2
ORDER
Dated this the 11th day of April 2024
The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.72/2021 of
Shornur Police Station initially registered for offence under
Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act. The crime came to be
registered on the basis of the information given by the 2nd
respondent about the missing of his wife from 07.03.2021
onwards. After investigation, the Police filed final report against
the defacto complainant's wife and the petitioner herein, alleging
that the wife had eloped with the petitioner after abandoning her
son. Hence, the accused were charged with the offences
punishable under Sections 75 and 87 of the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The petitioner has
approached this court seeking to quash the proceedings against
him based on the settlement arrived at between the petitioner, the
defacto complainant and his son, who has now attained majority.
2. The defacto complainant as well as his son have filed
affidavits stating that they have no subsisting grievance against
the petitioner, the 2nd accused in the crime, and that the
proceedings against him can be quashed.
3. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged,
nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavits, the
contents of which are vouched to be true and voluntary by the
counsel for respondents 2 and 3, I am satisfied that no public
interest is involved in this matter and the dispute has been settled
amicably. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties,
there is no possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in
conviction. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount
to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal
position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan
Mohan Abbot v State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and
Gian Singh v State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC
303], there is no impediment in granting the relief.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure-2 final report
and all further proceedings in S.C.No.59 of 2024 on the files of
the Additional Sessions Court-I, Palakkad as against the
petitioner, are quashed.
Sd/-
V.G. Arun
Judge
vpv
