Raveendran v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2015/12TH SRAVANA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 4907 of 2015 () --------------------------- CC. NO.366/2013 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, PERINTHALMANNA.

CRIME NO. 1250/2011 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION. .....

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

------------------------------------------- RAVEENDRAN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, CHOLAYIL (H), MANNARMALA, PATTIKKAD, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU.

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

----------------------------------------------------

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031, (THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT).

2. ABDUL MAJEED, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, PUKAYURKUNNATH (H), OLAKARA, THIROORANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT- 679 026.

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN. R2 BY ADV. SMT.T.J.SEEMA.

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

rs.

Crl.MC.No. 4907 of 2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE A:

TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1250/2011 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

----------------------------- --------------------------------- Dated this the 3 rd day of August, 2015.

O R D E R

The petitioner herein is the accused No.2 in the impugned Anx-A final report/charge sheet filed in Crime No.1250/2011 of Perinthalmanna Police Station, which is now pending as C.C.No.366/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate CourtI, Perinthalmanna, for the alleged offences punishable under Sec.420 r/w 34 of the IPC. The prosecution allegation is that the accused cheated the defacto complainant by offering him to give 40 shares and accepted monies from the defacto complainant (2nd respondent) and thereby committed the offence. Though there were two accused, it is stated in the impugned final report/charge sheet that the 1st accused has subsequently died and therefore he has been deleted from the accused array. So, the petitioner is the sole surviving accused. It is now submitted that the matter has been settled between the petitioner and the defacto complainant (2nd respondent) and that the defacto complainant has sworn to affidavit dated 30.7.2015 in this Crl.M.C,

::2::

stating that the matter has been settled and he does not have any subsisting grievance against the petitioner and that he has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner. It is in the light of these aspects that the prayer for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings has been made by the petitioner in the instant Crl.M.C.

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 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

::3::

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 final report/charge sheet filed in Crime No.1250/2011 of Perinthalmanna Police Station, which is now pending as C.C.No.366/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perinthalmanna, and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the petitioner herein stand quashed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. With these observations and directions, this Crl.M.C stands finally disposed of.

ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.

bkn/-