Kerala High Court
Rashid vs State Of Kerala on 28 June, 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
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 5077 OF 2024
CRIME NO.1984/2013 OF Kodakara Police Station, Thrissur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.401 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,IRINJALAKUDA
PETITIONER:
RASHID
AGED 44 YEARS
SON OF ABDUL MAJEED,
KOLLATTE HOUSE,
THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680123
BY ADV JITHIN BABU A
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 VISHWANATHAN
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O PRABHAKARAN NAIR,
PONATHE HOUSE,
KUNDUPADAM DESOM,
KALLETUMKARA VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680683
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
28.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 5077 OF 2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
-----------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 5077 of 2024
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of June, 2024
ORDER
Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 of
Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 to quash all proceedings
against him.
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in C.C. No.401 of 2019 on
the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court,
Irinjalakkuda, arising out of Crime No. 1984 of 2013 of Kodakara
Police Station, Thrissur, registered for the offences under
Sections 341 and 324 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860. Second respondent is the defacto complainant.
3. According to the prosecution, the accused had on
21-10-2023 restrained the defacto complainant and assaulted
him 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.
CRL.MC NO. 5077 OF 2024
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 3 affidavit filed by the 2nd
respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that
upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine,
and the defacto 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.
CRL.MC NO. 5077 OF 2024
No.401 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakkuda are quashed.
This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJM
CRL.MC NO. 5077 OF 2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO. 1984 OF 2013 OF KODAKARA POLICE
STATION, THRISSUR.
Annexure 2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 24/12/2013 LAID AGAINST THE
PETITIONER IN CC NO. 401/2019 ON THE
FILE OF THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE, IRINJALAKUDA.
Annexure 3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
25/05/2024
