SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rashad.K.J vs The State Of Kerala on 3 October, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

THURSDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 11TH ASWINA,
1941

Crl.MC.No.6817 OF 2019(B)

CRIME NO.185/2019 OF Badiadka Police Station, Kasargod

PETITIONER/S:
1 RASHAD.K.J, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. JAMAL,
RESIDING AT KULATHINGAL HOSUE, PERDALA P.O.,
BADIADKA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

2 JAMAL, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. HASSAN, RESIDING AT
KULATHINGAL HOSUE, PERDALA P.O., BADIADKA
VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI.T.MADHU
SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI

RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
BADIADKA POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 551.

3 MUBEENA K, AGED 21 YEARS
D/O. MOIDEEN KUNHI, RESIDING AT BAITHUL NOOR,
MUNIYOOR, KUMBADAJE VILLAGE AND POST,
KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 543.

R3 BY ADV. G.SANGEETHA

OTHER PRESENT:

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
::2::
Crl.MC.No.6817 OF 2019(B)

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
—————————–
Crl.M.C.No.6817 Of 2019
———————————
Dated this the 3rd day of October, 2019.

ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned

Anx-A1 FIR in Crime No.185/2019 of Badiadka Police Station,

Kasaragod District, registered for offences punishable under

Secs.406 498A of the SectionI.P.C, on the basis of the complaint of the

3rd respondent-de facto complainant. The prosecution allegation is

that the accused persons have treated the de facto complainant

with cruelty demanding more dowry. It is stated that now the

entire disputes between the petitioners and the 3 rd respondent de

facto complainant have been settled amicably and that the

3rd 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.

::3::

Crl.MC.No.6817 OF 2019(B)

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

this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

::4::

Crl.MC.No.6817 OF 2019(B)

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

the impugned Anx-A1 FIR in Crime No.185/2019 of Badiadka

Police Station, Kasaragod District and all further proceedings

arising therefrom pending against the petitioners will stand

quashed.

The learned counsel for the petitioners will produce a

certified copy of this order before the Investigating Officer

concerned as well as the court below concerned for necessary

information. The Office of the Advocate General will also forward

a certified copy of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned

for necessary information.

With these observations and directions, the Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS,
Judge.

bkn/-

::5::

Crl.MC.No.6817 OF 2019(B)

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.185/2019 OF BADIADKA POLICE
STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT

AGREEMENT DATED 17.9.2019 ENTERED INTO
BETWEEN THE FIRST PETITIONER AND THE
THIRD RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE A3 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 25.9.2019 SWORN IN
BY THE THIRD 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