IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 18TH ASWINA, 1941
Crl.MC.No.6960 OF 2019(H)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 828/2017 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
CRIME NO.759/2015 OF CHIRAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
VINU GOPAL
AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. GOPALAN,
PULIYANIKKAL LAKSHAM VEEDU,
ALTHARAMOODU, SARKARA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
(MOOLAMKUNNAM PURATHU VEEDU, PERUMGUZHI DESOM, AZHOOR
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.)
BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)
RESPONDENTS/STATE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.
2 SHEEJA,
AGED 34, D/O. BABU,
PULIYANIKKAL LAKSHAM VEEDU,
ALTHARAMOODU, SARKARA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT – 695 102.
R2 BY ADV. A.CHANDRA BABU
SRI.P.N.SUMODU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.6960 OF 2019(H)
2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
Crl.M.C.No.6960 of 2019
———————————–
Dated this the 10th day of October, 2019
ORDER
The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in
Annexure-A1 Final Report in Crime No.759/2015 of Chirayinkeezhu Police
Station, Thiruvananthapuram, which has been registered for offences
punishable under Secs.498A and 307 of the SectionIPC, which led to the
institution of S.C.No.828/2017 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court,
Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner herein is the husband of the
2nd respondent. The allegation of the prosecution is that the accused
harassed the de facto complainant demanding more dowry both physically
and mentally. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the
petitioner herein and the 2nd respondent de facto complainant have been
settled amicably and that the 2nd respondent has sworn to Annexure-A2
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
Crl.MC.No.6960 OF 2019(H)
3
petitioner and now they are living together. 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 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
Crl.MC.No.6960 OF 2019(H)
4
in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.
3. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the
impugned Annexure-A1 Final Report in S.C.No.828/2017 before the
Additional Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram arising from Crime
No.759/2015 of Chirayinkeezhu Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, and
all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused will
stand quashed.
4. The petitioner will produce certified copies of this order to the
Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below concerned.
Office of Advocate General will forward a copy of this order to the
Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information.
With these observations and directions, the above Criminal
Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
vgd
Crl.MC.No.6960 OF 2019(H)
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
S.C.828/2017 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
