SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Salim vs State Of Kerala on 16 December, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.8549 OF 2019(G)

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC 1212/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS -I, NEDUMANGAD

CRIME NO.1736/2016 OF VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION ,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1-3:

1 SALIM,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O. MUHAMMED THAHA, THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU,
KUTTIMOODU, VELLUMANNADY P.O., VENJARAMOODU,
NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 607

2 SEENATH BEEVI,
AGED 65 YEARS
W/O. MUHAMMED THAHA, THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU,
KUTTIMOODU, VELLUMANNADY P.O., VENJARAMOODU,
NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 607

3 SIYAD MUHAMMED,
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O. MUHAMMED THAHA, THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU,
KUTTIMOODU, VELLUMANNADY P.O., VENJARAMOODU,
NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 607

BY ADV. SRI.ARUN CHAND

RESPONDENTS/STATE CW1:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

2 RAZIYA,
AGED 26 YEARS
D/O. AISHATHU BEEVI, RESIDING AT THADATHARIKATHU
VEEDU, KARINCHI, NELLANADU VILLAGE, VENJARAMOODU.P.O,
NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 607

R2 BY ADV. P.K.THAMPI

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.8549 of 2019
2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C.No.8549 of 2019
———————————–
Dated this the 16th day of December, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein have been arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in

Crime No.1736/2016 of Venjaramoodu Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram, registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A

34 of the Indian Penal Code, which led to the pendency of Annexure-A1

final report in C.C.No.1212/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate’s Court (for the trial of Forest offences), Nedumangad. It is

stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioners herein and the

2nd respondent/de facto complainant have been settled amicably and that

the 2nd respondent has sworn to Annexure-A2 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.8549 of 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

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

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 Crime No.1736/2016 of Venjaramoodu Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram, which led to the pendency of Annexure-A1 final

report in C.C.No.1212/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class
Crl.M.C.No.8549 of 2019
4

Magistrate’s Court (for the trial of Forest offences), Nedumangad and all

further proceedings arising therefrom pending against all the accused will

stand quashed.

4. The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order to the

Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below concerned.

Office of Advocate General will forward a copy of this order to the

Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information.

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
vgd
Crl.M.C.No.8549 of 2019
5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.1736/2016 OF VENJARAMOODU POLICE
STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,WHICH IS NOW
PENDING AS C.C.NO.1212/2019 BEFORE THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, (FOR
THE TRIAL OF FOREST OFFENCES) NEDUMANGAD

ANNEXURE-A2 AN AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
STATING THAT SHE IS NOT HAVING FURTHER
INTENTION TO PROCEED AGAINST THE RESPONDENT

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