Abdul Shukkur v. K.Haseena
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/14TH SRAVANA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 5019 of 2015 ------------------------- IN CC 666/2015 of J.M.F.C.-I, KANNUR CRIME NO. 1514/2014 OF KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION, KANNUR PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
------------------ ABDUL SHUKKUR, S/O. IBRAHIM, AALUVALAPPIL PUTHIYAPURAYIL, M.P.HOUSE NEAR HYDROSE MASJID, P.O.KAKKAD, KANNUR - 670 005.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) SRI.ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH SRI.E.MOHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS & STATE:
-----------------------------------------
1. K.HASEENA, D/O. MOHAMMED, 'BUSHRAS', THALAP, KANNUR - 4.
2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.H.ABDUL RASAC R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.V.H.JASMINE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 5019 of 2015 ------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:
----------------------- A1 - COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1514/2014 .
A2 - COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:
----------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE ab
P.UBAID, J.
--------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.5019 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of August, 2015
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the accused in C.C No.666/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Kannur. He seeks orders quashing the prosecution on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between him and the de facto complainant. Crime in this case was registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code on the complaint of one Haseena who is the 1st respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The victim's affidavit shows that she has already been divorced by her husband, and that she has received adequate amount of compensation on amicable settlement. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will cause problems and embarrassment to both the parties. It is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.
2.
In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution in pending
Crl.M.C No.5019 of 2015 proceedings, if the parties have really settled the whole dispute amicably out of court, and continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose in such a circumstance of amicable settlement. Here, I find a real and genuine case of settlement between the parties. This is not a case involving any public interest or public issue. The parties have come to terms amicably on the intervention of persons acceptable to both sides. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will support the prosecution in such a situation, if the case goes to trial.
In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioner herein in C.C No.666/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Kannur will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioner will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by him will stand discharged. P.UBAID JUDGE ab