SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sanjay Ramachandran vs State Of Kerala on 14 March, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 1975 of 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 2/2017 of CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD

CRIME NO. 870/2016 OF PALAKKAD TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

PETITIONERS:

1 SANJAY RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 37 YEARS
S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT PUSHP VILLA CHS, MADONA
COLONY, MADAPESHWARD,
BORIVALI WEST, MUMBAI-400103.

2 INDIRA RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 62 YEARS
W/O. K.RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT PUSHP VILLA CHS,
MADONA COLONY, MADAPESHWARD,
BORIVALI WEST, MUMBAI-400103.

BY ADVS.
SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER
SMT.A.SREEKALA (VAIKOM)
SMT.KAIMAL PRIYA PADMANABHA
SRI.BIJU MATHEW
SRI.B.RAGHUNANDANAN
SRI.K.VISWANATHAN NAIR (KUTTIKAT)
SRI.M.S.AMAL DHARSAN

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

2 ANJALI.S., AGED 30 YEARS
W/O.SANJAI RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT 12/482,
CHANGOTHUMPADY HOUSE, GREENZ VILLAGE, AYYAPANKAVU,
KANNADI.P.O., PALAKKAD-678701.

BY ADV. SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1975 of 2019

2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C. No.1975 of 2019
———————————–
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned Anx-I FIR in

Crime No.870/2016 of Palakkad Town Police Station, Palakkad district,

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

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 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.IV 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 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
Crl.MC.No. 1975 of 2019

3

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.I FIR in Crime No.870/2016 of Palakkad Town Police Station,

Palakkad district, which has lead to the institution of Anx-II Final Report in

C.C. No.2/2017 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Palakkad

and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused will

stand quashed.

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS

JUDGE
Vgd/15.03.2019
Crl.MC.No. 1975 of 2019

4

APPENDIX

PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR DATED
18/8/2016.

ANNEXURE II TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
26/12/2016

ANNEXURE III TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING DATED 09/07/2018.

ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
30/01/2019 EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT

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 © 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