Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Thambi vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 9248 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 9248 Ker
Judgement Date : 3 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Thambi vs State Of Kerala on 3 April, 2024

Author: K.Babu

Bench: K. Babu

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
  WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA,
                                1946
                      CRL.MC NO. 7769 OF 2022
CRIME NO.2816/2019 OF Cherthala Police Station, Alappuzha
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.757 OF 2020 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, CHERTHALA
PETITIONER/S:

               THAMBI
               AGED 53 YEARS
               S/O MADHAVAN, PUTHENTHARAYIL HOUSE, WARD NO.2,
               KUTHIATHODE(P.O), KUTHIATHODE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN -
               688533
               BY ADVS.
               CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL
               ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL
               S.SREEDEV
               RONY JOSE
               LEO LUKOSE


RESPONDENT/S:

    1          STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
               KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
    2          BIJU GOPLAN
               AGED 51 YEARS
               S/O GOPALAN, NANA GARDENS(H) PODIYADI P.O,
               NEDUMBANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUVALLA TALUK,
               PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689110
               BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI G SUDHEER
        THIS     CRIMINAL   MISC.   CASE   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.,No.7769 of 2022

                                  ..2..




                                K.BABU, J.
                   --------------------------------------
                    Crl.M.C.No.7769 of 2022
                   ---------------------------------------
               Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2024

                             ORDER

The prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash Annexure A1

FIR and Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.2816 of

2019 of Cherthala Police Station and all further

proceedings pursuant to it on the ground that the parties

have arrived at a settlement in respect of the subject

matter.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused.

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are

punishable under Sections 323 and 353 of IPC.

4. Respondent No.2 entered appearance through

counsel. The affidavit sworn to by him has also been

placed before this Court.

5. Heard both sides.

..3..

6. I have perused the averments in the petition and

the affidavit sworn to by respondent No 2.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,

submitted that the matter was enquired into through the

Investigating Officer, who has taken the statement of the

victim, and it is reported that the dispute between the

parties has been amicably settled. The material placed

before the Court shows that the entire dispute between

the parties has been amicably settled and the defacto

complainant has decided not to proceed further. The

settlement between the parties is found to be voluntary

and fair. The settlement or the compromise satisfies the

conscience of the Court. It is seen that the victim agreed

to settle the matter with their free will.

8. 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 State

of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others

[(2019) 5 SCC 688] the Apex Court held that the High

..4..

Court, invoking Section 482 of Cr.P.C., can quash criminal

proceedings in relation to non-compoundable offences,

where the parties have settled the matter between

themselves notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of

Cr.P.C., if it is warranted in the given facts and

circumstances of the case, to ensure ends of justice or to

prevent abuse of the process of any Court.

9. In the instant case, the dispute is purely personal

in nature. There is nothing to show that public interest

will be compromised by quashing the proceedings. The

offences in question do not fall within the category of

serious offences or heinous offences.

10. The offences in the present case do not fall

within the category of offences prohibited for granting

permission to compromise in terms of the pronouncement

of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder

Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra).

11. This Court is of the view that no purpose will be

served in proceeding with the matter further.

..5..

Resultantly, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure A1 FIR

and Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.2816 of 2019

of Cherthala Police Station and all further proceedings

pursuant to it stand hereby quashed.

Sd/-

K.BABU JUDGE kkj

..6..

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO:2816/2019 DATED 25.10.2019 ALONG WITH FIS.

Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 11.12.2019 FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL IST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT- I, CHERTHALA IN C.C.NO.757/2020.

Annexure A3       AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
                  DATED    31.10.2022    AFFIRMING   THE
                  SETTLEMENT.
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter