SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vino Vincent vs State Of Kerala on 20 May, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1941

Crl.MC.No. 4919 of 2018

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 3033/2015 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS ,PEERUMEDU

CRIME NO. 352/2015 OF Upputhara Police Station , Idukki

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 12:

1 VINO VINCENT
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.VINCENT, ALLOOR HOUSE,ATTOOR P.O., THALAPPILLY
THALUK, THRISSUR.

2 MARY VINCENT
AGED 63 YEARS, W/O.VINCENT,ALLOOR HOUSE, ATTOOR
P.O.,THALAPPILLY THALUK,THRISSUR.

BY ADV. SRI.T.G.KRISHNAN (THRISSUR)

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

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

2 BINCY
D/O.JOHNI, KOMALAYIL HOUSE,MERIKULAM
ALADY,AYYAPPANKOVIL VILLAGE,IDUKKI – 695 507.

3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
UPPUTHARA POLICE STATION,IDUKKI – 685 507.

BY ADVS.

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1 AND R3,
SRI.K.S.ARUNDAS FOR R2

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.05.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 4919 of 2018

2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C. No.4919 of 2018
———————————–
Dated this the 20th day of May, 2019

ORDER

Petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the impugned Anx-A2

FIR in Crime No.352/2015 of Upputhara Police Station, Idukki district,

registered for offences punishable under Sec. 498A read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code which has led to the institution of Anx-A3 Final

Report in C.C. No.307/2016 on the files of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court – 1, Peerumedu. It is stated that now the entire disputes

between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent defacto complainant have

been settled amicably and that the 2nd respondent has sworn to Anx.R2(a)

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
Crl.MC.No. 4919 of 2018

3

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.A2 FIR in Crime No.352/2015 of Upputhara Police Station, Idukki

district, which has led to the institution of Anx-A3 Final Report in C.C.

No.307/2016 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – 1,

Peerumedu, and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against
Crl.MC.No. 4919 of 2018

4

all the accused will stand quashed.

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
SCS
Crl.MC.No. 4919 of 2018

5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS CMP
NO.3033/2015 BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE -I, PEERUMEDU.

ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE FIR NO.352/2015
REGISTERED BY THE UPPUTHARA POLICE.

ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
NO.166/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE UPPUTHARA
POLICE BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE-I, PEERUMEDU.

ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED
24/5/2017 IN CRL.M.C.NO.6284/2016 PASSED
BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT

ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P.

(RM) 441/2016 OF FAMILY COURT,
KATTAPPANA ALONG WITH MEMORANDUM OF
SETTLEMENT PREPARED BY THE PARTIES.

ANNEXURE A6 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER OF FAMILY
COURT KATTAPPANA IN O.P.(DIV) 355/2015.
//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