SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Tony Mendez vs State Of Kerala on 23 October, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 30TH ASWINA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.8332 OF 2018(B)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1196/2017 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS – IX, ERNAKULAM (TEMPORARY)

CRIME NO.649/2016 OF Palarivattom Police Station , Ernakulam

PETITIONER/S:

TONY MENDEZ
AGED 48 YEARS
TRIVENI, PALARIVATTOM, PIPE LANE, POONITHURA,
PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM.

BY ADVS.
SRI.E.D.GEORGE
KUM.LINU G. NATH

RESPONDENT/S:

1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

2 ANU MENDEZ
AGED 43, W/O.TONY, TRIVENI, PIPELINE ROAD, OPPOSITE
FRIENDSHIP NAGAR, PALARIVATTOM – 682 025.

R2 BY ADV. A.G.ANILKUMAR

OTHER PRESENT:

SRI.P.N.SUMODU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C.No. 8332 of 2018

Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2019
ORDER

The petitioner herein is the accused in the impugned Anx.II

final report/charge sheet filed in Anx.I FIR in Crime No.649/2016 of

Palarivattom Police Station, registered for offences punishable under

Secs.324 and 498A of the SectionI.P.C., which has led to the institution of

Calendar Case, C.C.No.1196/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate’s Court-IX, Ernakulam, on the basis of the complaint of

the 2nd respondent defacto complainant. It is stated that now the

entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent defacto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2 nd respondent

has sworn to Anx.IV affidavit before this Court, wherein it is stated

that she has settled the entire disputes with the petitioner and that

she has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal

proceedings pending against the petitioner. It is in the light of these

aspects that the petitioner has preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with the

prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against him.

2. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in

appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the
Crl.M.C.8332/2018 – : 3 :-

High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under

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.II final report/charge sheet filed in Anx.I FIR in

Crime No.649/2016 of Palarivattom Police Station, which has led to
Crl.M.C.8332/2018 – : 4 :-

the institution of Calendar Case, C.C.No.1196/2017 on the file of the

Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-IX, Ernakulam and all further

proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused will stand

quashed.

The petitioner 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.8332/2018 – : 5 :-

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME 649/2017 OF
PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE II COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE SHEET

NO.690/17 IN CRIME NO.649/17 DATED 2/6/2017 OF
PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION SUBMITTED BEFORE
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-IX,
ERNAKULAM.

ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN
ACCUSED AND THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT BEFORE
FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM.

ANNEXURE IV ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT/2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN STATING THAT
SHE HAS NO CASE AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN.

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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