SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jayesh Chandrabose vs State Of Kerala on 11 March, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

MONDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 1862 of 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 264/2018 of DISTRICT COURT
SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY

PETITIONER/S:

1 JAYESH CHANDRABOSE
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O CHANDRABOSE, MANDAKINI HOUSE, PARASSINIKKADAVU,
ANDOOR AMSOM, THALIPPARAMBA, KANNUR-670 563.

2 CHANDRABOSE,
AGED 1 YEARS
MANDAKINI HOUSE, PARASSINIKKADAVU, NEAR SNAKE PARK,
ANDOOR AMSON, THALIPPARAMBA, KANNUR 670 563

3 LALITHA,
AGED 1 YEARS
W/O CHANDRABOSE, MANDAKINI HOUSE, PARASSINIKKADAVU,
NEAR SNAKE PARK, ANDOOR AMSOM, THALIPPARAMBA, KANNUR
DISTRICT, PIN 670 563.

4 SUKANYA,
AGED 1 YEARS
D/O CHANDRABOSE, MANDAKINI HOUSE, PARASSINIKKADAVU,
NEAR SNAKE PARK, ANDOOR AMSOM, THALIPPARAMBA, KANNUR
DISTRICT, PIN 670 563.

BY ADVS.
SRI.C.A.CHACKO
SMT.C.M.CHARISMA
SMT.MEGHA K.XAVIER

RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THALIPPARAMBA
POLICE STATION, KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1862 of 2019

-:2:-

2 ANJU
AGED 27 YEARS
D/O PURUSHOTHAMAN, MUTTICHUR HOUSE,THALIKKULAM
P.O.NATTIKA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN 680 567

BY ADV. SRI.SEBY JOSEPH

OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.SEBY JOSEPH
FOR R2

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1862 of 2019

-:3:-

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C. No.1862 of 2019
———————————–
Dated this the 11th day of March, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 to 4 in the impugned Anx-A1

FIR in Crime No.1363/2017 of Thalipparamba Police Station, Kannur

district, registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A, 406, 323 and

324 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. It is stated that now the

entire disputes between the petitioners and the 2 nd respondent de facto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2 nd 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.

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

Cr.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
Crl.MC.No. 1862 of 2019

-:4:-

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 Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in

2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder 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.A1 FIR in Crime No.1363 of 2017 Thalipparamba Police

Station, Kannur district and all further proceedings arising therefrom

pending against the petitioners will stand quashed.

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
DST
Crl.MC.No. 1862 of 2019

-:5:-

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY FIR IN CRIME NO 1363/2017
OF THALIPPARAMBA POLICE STATION DATED
17.10.2017

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO
1363/2017 OF THALIPPARAMBA POLICE
STATION

ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT DATED 28.2.2019 OF 2ND
RESPONDENT

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh