SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Maheshkumar vs The 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. 3886 OF 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 334/2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -I,NEDUMANGAD

CRIME NO. 189/2012 OF VITHURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 MAHESHKUMAR, AGED 34 YEARS,
S/O. BHUVANACHANDRAN, MAHESH BHAVAN,
THOLLIKKODE VILLAGE, ANAPETTY, KADUKKAMOOD.

2 BHUVANACHANDRAN, AGED 66 YEARS,
S/O. PONNAN,MAHESH BHAVAN, THOLLIKKODE VILLAGE,
ANAPETTY, KADUKKAMOOD.

3 SANTHAMMA, AGED 56 YEARS,
D/O. GOMATHY.MAHESH BHAVAN, THOLLIKKODE VILLAGE,
ANAPETTY, KADUKKAMOOD

4 MANJUSHA, AGED 35 YEARS,
D/O. SANTHAMMA,MAHESH BHAVAN, THOLLIKKODE VILLAGE,
ANAPETTY, KADUKKAMOOD

BY ADV. SMT.N.P.ASHA

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING THE S.H.O.,
VADURA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRCT-695 001.

2 VIDYA, AGED 25 YEARS,
D/O.SATHI, VISHNU BHAVAN, KANNAMKARA, PARAPPIL,
THOLLIOKODE VILLAGE -695 001

BY ADV. SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1

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. 3886 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.189/2012 of Vidura Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram district, registered for offences punishable

under Secs.498A and 34 of the SectionIPC, which has led to the

institution of Anx.A2 Final Report in C.C.No.334/2012 on the file

of JFCM, Nedumangad. 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.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. 3886 / 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. 3886 / 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.189/2012 of Vidura Police

Station, Thiruvananthapuram district, which has led to the

institution of Anx.A2 Final Report in C.C.No.334/2012 on the file

of JFCM, Nedumangad, 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. 3886 / 2019

..5..

APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.189/2012 OF VIDURA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.189/2012 OF VIDURA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

ANNEXURE-A3 AFFIDAVIT OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
IN CRIME NO.189/2012 OF VIDURA POLICE
STATION, THIRUVANANTHPAURAM DISTRICT
DATED 17.11.2018

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