CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025

``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 1 2025:KER:22712 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 6[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ## `CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025` ``` CRIME NO.1053/2024 OF Chandera Police Station, Kasargod ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.48 OF 2025 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,HOSDRUG ``` ## `PETITIONER/ACCUSED:` ``` HUDAIFA C.H, AGED 42 YEARS S/O ABDUL KHADAR,RESIDING AT CHEKKINTEKATH HOUSE,UDUMBUNTHALA, SOUTH THRIKARIPUR VILLAGE,KASARAGOD DISTRICT,, PIN - 671311 ``` ``` BY ADVS. RESHMA E. ANJITHA SANTHOSH ATHEENA ANTONY ``` ## `RESPONDENT/:STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT` ``` 1STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2MUHSINABHI M , AGED 34 YEARS MUHSINABHI M ,W/O SAHUBAR ALI.B,RESIDING AT MADAMBILLATH HOUSE, KUTTICHI, UDUMBUMTHALA, ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 2 2025:KER:22712 ``` ``` UDUMBUMTHALA P.O, SOUTH TRIKARIPUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 671311 ``` ``` BY ADV ANJU JOSEPH SR.PP -C.N.PRABHAKARAN ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 3 2025:KER:22712 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.`** ``` ------------------------------------ CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 6[th] day of March, 2025 ``` ## **`ORDER`** ``` A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect of offences which are not compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was that the offences against human body, other than murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be compounded, when the court is in a position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with approval by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 4 2025:KER:22712 ``` ``` and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the extent of sanctioning invocation of the inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R. in a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is a heinous and serious offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant findings of which are extracted herebelow: ``` ``` “6.We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 5 2025:KER:22712 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” ``` ``` 2.In the facts at hand, petitioner is the sole accused person in Crime No.1053 of 2024 of Chandera Police Station, Kasargode, now pending as C.C.No.48/2025 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg. As per the final report the offences alleged are under Sections 126(2) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. The petitioner seeks quashment of entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the parties. ``` ``` 3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the defacto complainant/respondent no.2 and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the records. ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 6 2025:KER:22712 ``` ``` 4.When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to record the statement of the defacto complainant. The said direction was complied and the statement was handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the defacto complainant has no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto complainant (2[nd] respondent herein) as Annexure-A3, wherein she would unequivocally state that the disputes have been settled and that she does not want to proceed against the petitioner, any further. The defacto complainant would also swear that she has no grievance against the petitioner and that she has no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The affidavit is sworn to on her own volition, without any compulsion, whatsoever. This Court, is therefore, convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` ``` 7 2025:KER:22712 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` bonafide. Learned Counsel for the 2[nd] respondent/defacto complainant would also endorse that the quashment sought for can be allowed. ``` ``` 5.In the light of the above referred facts, this Court is of the opinion that the necessary parameters, as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra),Madan Mohan Abbot(supra) and Gian Singh (Supra), are fully satisfied. This Court is convinced that further proceedings against the petitioner will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been settled. There is little possibility of any conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement arrived at by and between the parties, if they are compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of this Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court. The quashment sought for would secure the ends of justice. This Court also notice that offences under Sections 126(2) and 115(2) are compoundable, which is ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 8 2025:KER:22712 ``` ``` all the more a reason to accept the compromise between the parties. ``` ``` In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A1 F.I.R., Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.1053 of 2024 and all further proceedings in C.C.No.48/2025 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg, are hereby quashed. ``` ``` Sd/- ``` ``` C. JAYACHANDRAN ``` ``` JUDGE ``` ``` ska ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1305 OF 2025 ``` **==> picture [58 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 9 2025:KER:22712 ``` ## `APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1305/2025` ## `PETITIONER ANNEXURES` ``` Annexure A1THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS DATED 18.12.2024 IN CRIME NO.1053 OF 2024 AT CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT Annexure A2A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 31.12.2024 IN C.C NO 48 OF 2025 ALONG WITH MEMO OF EVIDENCE, STATEMENT OF ALL AVAILABLE WITNESS IN THE CRIME NO.1053 OF 2024 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT Annexure A3A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 14.01.2025 SIGNED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE AN ADVOCATE ```