SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Hareesh Govind vs State Of Kerala on 6 June, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1941

CRL.MC.NO. 3871 OF 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 608/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -II,PERINTHALMANNA

CRIME NO. 757/2015 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 HAREESH GOVIND, AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O.JANARDHANAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, NILAMBUR.P.O,
VEETTICHAL, RAMANKUTHU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

2 KOMALAVALLI, AGED 61 YEARS,
W/O.JANARDHANAN, THAYYIL HOUYSE, NILAMBUR.P.O,
VEETTICHAL, RAMANKUTHU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

3 PRIYA JANARDHANAN, AGED 36 YEARSM
D/O.JANARDHANAN, THAYYIL HOUYSE, NILAMBUR.P.O,
VEETTICHAL, RAMANKUTHU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SMT.S.K.SREELAKSHMY

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM-682031
(CRIME NO.757/2015 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION IN
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT)

2 DHANYA S., AGED 37 YEARS,
D/O.SADANANDAN, AMRITHAM HOUSE, HOSPITAL HILL,
NILAMBUR P.O, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN-679329

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1,
SRI.P.SAMSUDIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
————————————
Crl.M.C. No. 3871 of 2019
————————————
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned

Anx.A1 FIR in Crime No.757/2015 of Nilambur Police Station,

Malappuram district, registered for offences punishable under

Secs.498A, 406, 323 r/w 34 of the SectionIPC, which has led to the

institution of Anx.A2 Final Report in C.C.No.608/2018 on the file

of JFCM-II, Perinthalmanna. It is stated that now the entire

disputes between the petitioners and the 2 nd respondent defacto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2nd

respondent has sworn to Anx.A3 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.

Crl.M.C. No. 3871 / 2019

..3..

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 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
Crl.M.C. No. 3871 / 2019

..4..

this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

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

the impugned Anx.A1 FIR in Crime No.757/2015 of Nilambur

Police Station, Malappuram district, which has led to the

institution of Anx.A2 Final Report in C.C.No.608/2018 on the file

of JFCM-II, Perinthalmanna, and all further proceedings arising

therefrom pending against the accused persons will stand quashed.

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

MMG
Crl.M.C. No. 3871 / 2019

..5..

APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.757/2015
OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.757/2015 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE A3 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 29.05.2019 SWORN
IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT (DE-FACTO
COMPLAINANT)

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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