Kerala High Court
Rajesh vs State Of Kerala on 13 March, 2025
Crl.M.C.No.1902 of 2025
-: 1 :-
2025:KER:25107
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 1902 OF 2025
CRIME NO.862/2022 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.136 OF 2023 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOTTARAKKARA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
RAJESH
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O. GOPINATHAN, AGED 53, MALIAKKAL HOUSE,
NARAKATHARA MURI, KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688506
BY ADVS.
SAIJO HASSAN
SANGEETH MOHAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691506
Crl.M.C.No.1902 of 2025
-: 2 :-
2025:KER:25107
3 G. S. NANDANA KRISHNAN
AGED 25 YEARS
D/O. SUNILA KUMARI, CKRA 91 B, CHENCHERI LANE,
MANNANTHALA, ULLOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695015
BY ADVS. B.SABITHA (DESOM)
E.C. BINEESH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.1902 of 2025
-: 3 :-
2025:KER:25107
O R D E R
A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another
[(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad guidelines as regards
quashment of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of
the Code in respect of offences which are not compoundable
in terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the
guidelines was that the offences against human body, other
than murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be
compounded, when the Court is in a position to record a
finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary
and fair. These guidelines were quoted with approval by a
three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian
Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303].
Similarly in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab
[(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to
the extent of sanctioning invocation of the inherent power
under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash
-: 4 :-
2025:KER:25107
the F.I.R in a crime alleging offence under Section 307,
which is a henious and serious offence. A practical approach
is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madan Mohan
Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards
quashment in respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418,
etc., the relevant findings of which are extracted here
below:
"6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps
advisable that in disputes where the question
involved is of a purely personal nature, the court
should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise
even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter
alive with no possibility of a result in favour of
the prosecution is a luxury which the courts,
grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and
that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding
more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a
common sense approach to the matter based on ground
of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the
law."
2. In the facts at hand, petitioner is the sole accused
in Crime No.862 of 2022 of Kottarakkara Police Station,
-: 5 :-
2025:KER:25107
Kollam, now pending as C.C.No.136/2023 before the Judicial
First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kottarakkara. As per the
Final Report, the offence alleged is under Section 354 of
the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner seeks quashment of
entire proceedings in the above Calender Case, on the
strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the
parties.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner; learned
counsel for the defacto complainant/3 rd respondent and the
learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.
4. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to
record the statement of the defacto complainant. The said
direction was complied and the statement of the defacto
complainant/3rd respondent was handed over. On perusal of the
same, it is clear that the defacto complainant is
disinterested to proceed with the prosecution case against
the petitioner and that she and her family have no objection
-: 6 :-
2025:KER:25107
in quashing the criminal case against the petitioner. That
apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an
affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto complainant as
Annexure-3, wherein she would unequivocally state that the
disputes have been amicably settled out of the Court and
that the defacto complainant does not want to proceed with
the case against the petitioner any more. The defacto
complainant would also swear that she has no further
grievance against the petitioner and that she has no
objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the
petitioner. The affidavit is sworn to on her volition,
without any compulsion, whatsoever. Moreover, learned
counsel for the defacto complainant/R3 would submit that the
quashment sought for can be allowed in view of the
settlement arrived at. This Court is therefore convinced
that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide.
5. In the light of the above referred facts, this Court is
of the opinion that the necessary parameters, as culled out
-: 7 :-
2025:KER:25107
in Narinder Singh (supra), Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and
Gian Singh (supra), are fully satisfied. This court is
convinced that further proceedings against the petitioner
will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have
already been settled. There is little possibility of any
conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement arrived at by
and between the parties, if they are compelled to face the
criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of this
Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court. The
quashment sought for would secure the ends of justice.
6. In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed.
Annexure-2 Final Report and all further proceedings in
C.C.No.136/2023 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate
Court-I, Kottarakkara, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE
ww
-: 8 :-
2025:KER:25107
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
862/2022 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION,
DATED 13.04.2022
ANNEXURE 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED
AS CC NO. 136/2023 DATED 09.08.2022 ON
THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT -I, KOTTARAKARA
ANNEXURE 3 NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 19.02.2025
