SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jitheesh A.V. 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 06TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 16TH JYAISHTA, 1941

CRL.MC.NO. 3880 OF 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 95/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS ,CHAVAKKAD

CRIME NO. 2034/2014 OF VADANAPPALLY POLICE STATION , THRISSUR

PETITIONERS:

1 JITHEESH A.V., AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AARUKETTI VEEDU, THAPPANKADAVU,
THALIKKULAM P.O.,THRISSUR-680 569.

2 VELAYUDHA,
S/O.MAMU, AARUKETTI VEEDU, THAPPANKADAVU,
THALIKKULAM P.O.,THRISSUR-680 569

3 DHANASREE SIBIN,
W/O. SIBIN, KOZHISSERY HOUSE,
KAZHIMPRAM, THRISSUR-680 568

4 SININ DHAMAN LAL,
W/O.DHAMAN LAL, HARRISON VILLA,
EDRIKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTICT-676 501

BY ADV. SRI.PREMCHAND M.

RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA
REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 LIJITHA, AGED 34 YEARS,
D/O. ASOKAN A.K., ALIL VEEDU, MANATHALA,
CHAVAKKAD P.O., CHAVAKKAD VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 506.

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1,
SMT.HARSHA C.GOPI, 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. 3880 of 2019
————————————
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned

Anx.A FIR in Crime No.2034/2014 of Vadanappally Police

Station, Thrissur district, registered for offences punishable under

Secs.417, 406, 498A r/w 34 of the SectionIPC, which has led to the

institution of Anx.B Final Report in C.C.No.95/2015 on the file of

JFCM, Chavakkad. It is stated that now the entire disputes

between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent defacto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2nd

respondent has sworn to Anx.C 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. 3880 / 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. 3880 / 2019

..4..

this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

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

the impugned Anx.A FIR in Crime No.2034/2014 of Vadanappally

Police Station, Thrissur district, which has led to the institution of

Anx.B Final Report in C.C.No.95/2015 on the file of JFCM,

Chavakkad, 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. 3880 / 2019

..5..

APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.2034/2014 OF
VADANAPPALLY POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE-B TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
SUBMITTED BY VADANAPPALLY, POLICE
BEFORE THE JFCM COURT, CHAVAKKAD

ANNEXURE-C AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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