Kerala High Court
Rayees 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. 245 OF 2024
CRIME NO.924/2023 OF Thaliparamba Police Station, Kannur
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.1 AND 2:
1 RAYEES
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O FAYIS, SEKKALI HOUSE, COCHIPALLI,KANNUR CITY, NOW
RESIDING AT DARUL AMAN QUARTERS KAKKAD ,KANNUR, PIN -
670005.
2 RAMLATH
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O FAYIS, SEKKALI HOUSE, COCHIPALLI,KANNUR CITY, NOW
RESIDING AT DARUL AMAN QUARTERS KAKKAD ,KANNUR, PIN -
670005.
BY ADV M.ANUROOP
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031.
2 MAJIDA. K
AGED 23 YEARS
D/O. THAJUDHEEN, MAJIDA MANZIL, NR. MADRASSA, SERVICE
STATION ROAD, THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR RURAL, PIN - 670141.
SRI.G.P SUDHEER, PP
SRI.MURSHID ALI. M
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 245 OF 2024 2
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused persons in
Crime No.924 of 2023 of the Taliparamba Police
Station, Kannur. The offence alleged are under
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The 2nd
respondent is the de facto complainant.
2. The petitioners seek to quash Annexure A1
FIR in the said crime and all further proceedings
thereto against the petitioners, on the premise
that the disputes between the petitioners and the
2nd respondent/de facto complainant have been
settled amicably and that the de facto complainant
is not any more interested to prosecute the matter.
Along with the Crl.M.C, Annexure A2 affidavit was
sworn to by the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant,
where she would state that the disputes had been
settled amicably and that she has no surviving
grievance against the petitioners. The deponent
would also state that she has no objection in
quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.
3. When this case was moved, this Court
directed the learned Public Prosecutor to get
instructions, along with a signed statement of the
de facto complainant. The same is also made
available. In the signed statement of the de facto
complainant also, she would reiterate her stand in
Annexure A2 affidavit.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and
Sri.Murshid Ali. M, the learned counsel appearing
for the de facto complainant/2nd respondent.
5. In view of the judgments of 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 defacto complainant had unequivocally expressed
her intention to withdraw the criminal proceedings
against the petitioners. The issues involved in
this crime are purely private in nature, without in
any way impacting the society at large.
In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C is allowed
and Annexure A1 FIR and all further proceedings
pursuant to Crime No.924 of 2023 of Taliparamba
Police Station, Kannur, as against the petitioners
are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sru
PETITIONERS ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 924/2023
OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION DATED 09-06-
2023.
Annexure A2 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 10-12-2023 SWORN IN BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
