SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shibin Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 20 March, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1940

CRL.MC.NO. 2174 OF 2019

CRIME NO. 35/2019 OF POTHUKAL POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

PETITIONERS:

1 SHIBIN VARGHESE, AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O VARGHESE, ATTUPURATH HOUSE, UPPADA P.O.
NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 334

2 KALARAMMA, AGED 53 YEARS,
W/O VARGHESE, ATTUPURATH HOUSE, UPPADA P.O.
NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 334

3 POLSON @ SHINE VARGHESE, AGED 34 YEARS,
S/O VARGHESE, ATTUPURATH HOUSE, UPPADA P.O.
NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 334

BY ADVS.
SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN
SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN

RESPONDENTS:

1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
(INSTRUCTIONS THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
POTHUKAL POLICE STATION IN MALAPPURAM DISTRICT)

2 AISWARYA.M.JOLLY, AGED 23 YEARS,
D/O JOLLY JOSEPH, MUKKANOLIKKAL HOUSE, ULIKKAL
P.O.ERUTHKADAVU, VAYATHUR VILLAGE,
ULIKKAL PANCHAYATH, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT
(WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF IRITTY POLICE STATION
IN KANNUR DISTRICT-670 705)

SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1,
SMT.T.J.SEEMA FOR R2
SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
————————————
Crl.M.C. No. 2174 of 2019
————————————
Dated this the 20th day of March, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned

Anx.1 FIR in Crime No.35/2019 of Pothukal Police Station,

Malappuram district, registered for offences punishable under

Secs.498A, 406, 313, 506(1), 354A r/w 34 of the IPC and

Sec.119(b) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011. It is stated that now the

entire disputes between the petitioners and 2nd respondent defacto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2 nd

respondent has sworn to an 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,
Crl.M.C. No. 2174 / 2019

..3..

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
Crl.M.C. No. 2174 / 2019

..4..

the impugned Anx.1 FIR in Crime No.35/2019 of Pothukal Police

Station, Malappuram district and all further proceedings arising

therefrom pending against the accused persons will stand quashed.

With these observations and directions, the Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS,
JUDGE

MMG
Crl.M.C. No. 2174 / 2019

..5..

APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO
0035/2019 OF POTHUKAL POLICE STATION
DATED 1.2.2019 ALONG WITH FIRST
INFORMATION STATEMENT OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT

ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY
THE PETITIONERS AND THE 2ND 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