Kerala High Court
Bibin Raj vs State Of Kerala on 4 April, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA,
1946
CRL.MC NO. 2655 OF 2024
CRIME NO.2102/2019 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION,
PATHANAMTHITTA
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.2109 OF 2019
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , ADOOR
PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED :
BIBIN RAJ, AGED 28 YEARS
S/O RAJAN PILLAI,
PADIKATHIL VEEDU, PETTAYAM,
THENGAMOM MURI,
PALLIKKAL VILLAGE, PIN - 690 561.
BY ADV VIDYA G NAIR
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
2 ABBHIRAJ, AGED 29 YEARS
S/O SURESH, SUBI BHAVANAM,
NEAR POYKAYIL CHANDA,
CHERUKUNNAM MURIYIL,
PALLIKKAL VILLAGE, ANAYADI P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 690 561.
BY ADV ANANDAKRISHNAN .S - R2
SRI. T.R. RANJITH (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC 2655/2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
......................................................
Crl.M.C.No.2655 of 2024
...................................................
Dated this the 4th day of April, 2024
ORDER
Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all
proceedings against him.
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.2109/2019 on the files of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor, arising out of Crime
No.2102/2019 of Adoor Police Station, registered for the offences under
Sections 324, and 323 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The
second respondent is the de facto complainant.
3. According to the prosecution, on 10.11.2019 the accused assaulted the de
facto complainant with an iron rod and thereby committed the offences
alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the
respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. 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.
6. 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 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].
7. I have perused Annexure-A3 affidavit filed by the second respondent. The
learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is
understood that the affidavit is genuine, and de facto 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.
8. Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.2109/2019 on
the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor, are quashed.
This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/08/04/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 CERYTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO
2102/2019 REGISTERED BY ADOOR POLICE STATION
DATED 11/11/2019.
ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO
2109/2019 BEFORE THE HON,BLE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -ADOOR DATED 07/03/2020.
ANNEXURE3 A3 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 05/03/2024.
TRUE COPY
