SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Amladh vs State Of Kerala on 4 November, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 13TH KARTHIKA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.7607 OF 2019(A)

IN CC 782/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,
KOLLAM

CRIME NO.289/2013 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION , Kollam

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 AMLADH,
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O FAZALUDEEN, CHEKUMMOOTTIL VEETTIL,
KAIRALI NAGAR-102,
EAST OF KUTTICHIRA PUTHEN CHANTHA,
KILLIKOLLOOR CHERRY,
KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE ,
KOLLOM DISTRICT-691 004.

2 RAFIYATH BEEVI,
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O FAZALUDEEN, CHEKUMMOOTTIL VEETTIL,
KAIRALI NAGAR-102,
EAST OF KUTTICHIRA PUTHEN CHANTHA,
KILLIKOLLOOR CHERRY,
KILIKOLLOOR VILLAGE ,
KOLLOM DISTRICT-691 004.

BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI
SMT.S.SEETHA
SMT.ANJANA KANNATH

RESPONDENT/STATE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31.
Crl.M.C. No. 7607 of 2019

2

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM-691 011

3 SHEEBA,
AGED 31 YEARS
D/O KABEER, PLAVILA VEEDU,
SANTHI NAGAR-241, AYATHIL,
VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 010.

BY ADV.
A.MUHAMMED RAFFI -R3

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No. 7607 of 2019

3

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
————————————
Crl.M.C. No. 7607 of 2019
————————————
Dated this the 4th day of November, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein have the accused in the impugned Anx.1

FIR in Crime No.289/2013 of Eravipuram Police Station, Kollam

district, registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A and 34 of

SectionIPC, which has led to the institution of Anx.2 Final report in C.C

No.782/2013 on the file of JFCM-II, Kollam. It is stated that now the

entire disputes between the petitioners and 3rd respondent defacto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 3rd respondent

has sworn to Anx.3 affidavit before this Court, wherein it is stated

that she has settled the entire disputes with the petitioners and that

she has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal

proceedings pending against the petitioners. It is in the light of these

aspects that the petitioners have preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with

the prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against them.

2. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in

appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the

High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under
Crl.M.C. No. 7607 of 2019

4

Sec.482 of the SectionCr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole

dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any

purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the

parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in

such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the

precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the

court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the

investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and

taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this

case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles

laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in SectionGian Singh v. State

of Punjab reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 (2012) 10 SCC 303

and SectionNarinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr.

reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29

thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for

quashment.

3. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the

impugned Anx.1 FIR in Crime No.289/2013 of Eravipuram Police

Station, Kollam district, which has led to the institution of Anx.2
Crl.M.C. No. 7607 of 2019

5

Final report in C.C No.782/2013 on the file of JFCM-II, Kollam, and

all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused

persons will stand quashed.

4. The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order

before Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court

below concerned. The office of the Advocate General will forward

copy of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned for

information.

With these observations and directions, the Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS,
JUDGE

KAS
Crl.M.C. No. 7607 of 2019

6

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO 289/2013
OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
289/2013 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE 3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT REGARDING THE COMPROMISE
DATED 29.10.2019

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation