SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smanesh.T.P vs State Of Kerala on 24 May, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1941

Crl.MC.No. 3575 of 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 230/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS – IX, ERNAKULAM (TEMPORARY)

CRIME NO. 543/2017 OF Cheranelloor Police Station , Ernakulam

PETITIONER/S:
1 SMANESH.T.P, AGED 36 YEARS
S/O.PARAMESWARAN, THUNDIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
CHERANELLOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

2 PARAMESWARAN,AGED 62 YEARS
S/O.GANGADHARAN, THUNDIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERANELLOR,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

3 SANESEH, AGED 31 YEARS,
D/O.S/O.PARAMESWARAN,THUNDIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
CHERANELLOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.T.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR

RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR
OF POLICE, CHERANELLOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM PIN-682031

2 LISHA P.C., AGED 35 YEARS
D/O.CHELLAPPAN, PUTHIYANIKATHIL HOUSE,
CHERANELLOR.P.O, CHERANELLOR VILLAGE, KANNAYANNUR
TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683544

OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1,
SRI.M.V.LALU MATHEWS FOR R2
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C.No. 3575 of 2019

Dated this the 24th day of May, 2019
ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned Anx.A1

final report/charge sheet in Crime No.543/2017 of Cheranallur Police

Station, registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A 34 of

the SectionI.P.C., which has led to the institution of C.C.No. 230/2018 on the

file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-IX, Ernakulam, on

the basis of the complaint of the 2 nd respondent defacto complainant.

It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioners and

2nd respondent defacto complainant have been settled amicably and

that the 2nd respondent has sworn to Anx.A-2 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
Crl.M.C.3575/19 – : 3 :-

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.

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

impugned Anx.A1 final report/charge sheet in Crime No. 543/2017 of

Cheranallur Police Station, which has led to the institution of

C.C.No. 230/2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s
Crl.M.C.3575/19 – : 4 :-

Court-IX, Ernakulam and all further proceedings arising therefrom

pending against the accused persons will stand quashed.

The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order before

the 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 above Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Crl.M.C.3575/19 – : 5 :-

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN CC.NO.230/2018,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-IX, ERNAKULAM ARISING OUT OF
CRIME NO.543/2017 OF CHERANELLOOR POLICE
STATION.

ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT DATED 21.05.2017 SWORN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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