Kerala High Court
Raju @ Sreeraj vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 3095 OF 2024
CRIME NO.562/2024 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
1 RAJU @ SREERAJ
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. RAVEENDRAN, AMBALAKKADU HOUSE, KANAKKANCHERI,
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
2 SREENATH A
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O. RAVEENDRAN, AMBALAKKADU HOUSE, KANAKKANCHERI,
PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679322, PIN - 679322
3 KUNJANI @ VINEETH KUMAR V
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O. THAMI, PARANGODAN HOUSE, PONMALAAMSOMDESOM, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676528
BY ADV U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 JAYALAL K.S
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O. SOMAN K.V., KOORATHUKUNNU HOUSE, PATHAIKKARA VILLAGE,
PERINTALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679322
BY ADVS.
G. SUDHEER-PP
P.M.SHAHIDA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No.3095 of 2024
2
C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.3095 of 2024
------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of April, 2024
ORDER
The petitioners are accused nos.1 to 3 in Crime
No.562/2024 of Perinthalmanna Police Station. The
offences alleged are under Sections 341, 323, 326 and
506, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The
petitioners seek to quash Annexure-I F.I.R. in the above
crime, which is within the jurisdiction of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perinthalmanna, on the
premise that the disputes between the petitioners and
the second respondent/de facto complainant have been
settled amicably. Along with the Crl.M.C., the petitioners
filed Annexure-II affidavit sworn to by the second
respondent/de facto complainant, wherein she would
state that all the disputes have been settled amicably
and that she has no surviving grievance as against the
petitioners. The deponent would also state that she is
not interested to prosecute the case any more and that,
she has no objection to quash further proceedings in
the crime afore referred.
2. When the Crl.M.C. was moved, this Court
directed the learned Public Prosecutor to get
instructions. Accordingly, a report of the Station House
Officer concerned, along with a signed statement of the
de facto complainant has been produced. A perusal of
the statement would reiterate that the de facto
complainant is not any more interested to prosecute the
matter, since the issues have been settled amicably.
3. In view of the judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi & Ors vs State Of Haryana
& Anr [2003 (4) SCC 675] and Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], this Court finds that no
useful purpose is to be served by continuing the
prosecution as against the petitioners, inasmuch as the
de facto complainant had unequivocally expressed her
intention to withdraw the criminal proceedings against
the petitioners.
In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and
Annexure-I F.I.R. in Crime No.562/2024 of the
Perinthalamanna Police Station and all further
proceedings therefrom as against the petitioners are
hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
SKP/16-04
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN
CRIME NO. 562 OF 2024 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE
STATION DATED 20.03.2024
ANNEXURE II THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 22.03.2024
EXECUTED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:NIL
TRUE COPY
P.A. TO JUDGE
