SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 2 December, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.8528 OF 2019(E)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 818/2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGIST. COURT, ANGAMALY(TEMPORARY)

CRIME NO.2131/2015 OF ANKAMALY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

VARGHESE
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. THOMAS, THEKKAN VAZHAKKULAM HOUSE, KODUSSERY
KARA, VATTAPPARAMBU, PARAKKADAVU VILLAGE

BY ADV. SRI.JAISON JOSEPH

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND CW1:

1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, EERNAKULAM 682 031
REPRESENTING SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, ANKAMALY POLICE
STATION.

2 DIMPLE
D/O. PAUL, NADAVARAMBAN HOUSE,KUTTIKKAD KARA
PARIYARAM VILLAGE, CHALAKUDY TALUK 683501

R2 BY ADV. P.S.APPU
Crl.MC.No.8528 OF 2019(E) 2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C.No.8528/2019

DATED THIS 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2019

ORDER

The petitioner herein is the accused in the impugned Anx. A2

charge sheet filed in Anx. A1 FIR in Crime No. 2131/2015 of Ankamaly

Police Station in Ernakulam District, registered for offences punishable

under Secs. 406 and 498A of the SectionIPC., which has led to the institution

of Calendar Case, C.C.No.818/2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court, Ankamaly, on the basis of the complaint of the 2 nd

respondent . It is stated that now the entire disputes between the

petitioner and the 2nd respondent have been settled amicably and that

the 2nd respondent has sworn to Anx. A3 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 High

Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of
Crl.MC.No.8528 OF 2019(E) 3

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. A2 charge sheet filed in Anx. A1 FIR in Crime No.

2131/2015 of Ankamaly Police Station in Ernakulam District, which has

led to the institution of Calendar Case, C.C.No.818/2016 on the file of

the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ankamaly, and all further

proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused will stand

quashed.

Crl.MC.No.8528 OF 2019(E) 4

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/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS

JUDGE

DM
Crl.MC.No.8528 OF 2019(E) 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R ALONG WITH
THE COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO. 2131 OF 2015
OF ANGAMALY POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORTCHARGE
SHEET IN C.C NO. 818 OF 2016 ON THE FILE
OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,
ANGAMALY.

ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO. 2

//TRUE COPY //
PA TO JUDGE

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