SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Suneer vs The State Of Kerala on 13 March, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 1219 of 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 382/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -II,PERINTHALMANNA

CRIME NO. 60/2018 OF MANKADA POLICE STATION , Malappuram

PETITIONER/S:

1 SUNEER, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.UNEEN KUTTY,
KALLATHINGAL HOUSE, VERUMPILAKAL, KADANNAMANNA,
MANKADA, MALAPPUPRAM-679324.

2 SHAFLA, AGED 29 YEARS, D/O.UNEER KUTTY,
KALLATHINGAL HOUSE, VERUMPILAKAL, KADANNAMANNA,
MANKADA, MALAPPURAM-679324.

3 ABDU HAJI, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.UNEEN KUTTY,
KALLATHINGAL HOUSE, VERUMPILAKAL, KADANNAMANNA,
MANKADA, MALAPPURAM-679324.

BY ADVS.
SRI.K.M.FIROZ
SMT.M.SHAJNA

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

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER’ FEROKE POLICE STATION,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-676631.

3 SHAKEELA V.,D/O.MOHAMMEDUNNI, AGED 23, RESIDING AT
VENGASHERI HOUSE, VELLILA, MANKADA, PERINTHALMANNA-
679324.

OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1
AND R2,SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ FOR R3
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C.No. 1219 of 2019

Dated this the 13th day of March, 2019
ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned Anx. A-1

Final Report in Crime No.60/2018 of Mankada Police Station,

Malappuram district, registered for offences punishable under Secs.498A,

406 read with Sec. 34 of the I.P.C., on the basis of the complaint filed by

the 3rd respondent defacto complainant, which has led to the institution of

C.C.No.382/2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-

II, Perinthalmanna. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the

petitioners and 3rd respondent defacto complainant have been settled

amicably and that the 3rd respondent has sworn to Anx. A-2 affidavit before

this Court, wherein it is stated that he 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
Crl.M.C.1219/19 – : 3 :-

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 Anx. A-1 Final Report in Crime No.60/2018 of Mankada Police

Station, Malappuram district, which has led to the institution of C.C.No.

382/2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II,

Perinthalmanna, and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending

against the accused persons will stand quashed.

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Crl.M.C.1219/19 – : 4 :-

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.60 OF 2018 OF MANKADA POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD 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 © 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