CRL.MC NO. 1788 OF 2025

``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1788 OF 2025 ``` ``` 1 ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 13[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ## `CRL.MC NO. 1788 OF 2025` ``` CRIME NO.929/2022 OF Kodumon Police Station, Pathanamthitta ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.267 OF 2023 OF JUDICIAL ``` ``` MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , ADOOR ``` ## `PETITIONER/ACCUSED:` ``` LIJO REJI AGED 40 YEARS VADAKEDU, PUTHENPURAYIL,PUTHUMLA P.O PUTHUMALA, EZHAMKULAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 691554 BY ADVS. T.M.RAMAN KARTHA MANJULA NAIR KEERTHI.S.NAIR REVATHY M.A. GREESHMA T.G. ``` ## `RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:` ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KODUMON POLICE STATION POLICE STATION, ADOOR PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 691001 3SUBI KOSHY W/O SAJU GEORGE. RESIDING AT VAYALIRAKKATHU, ANGADICKAL NORTH P.O ANGADICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689648 BY ADV M.VIJESH KUMAR SRI. E.C. BINEESH (PP) ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ``` ``` 13.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :2: **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` C.JAYACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 13[th]day of March, 2025 ``` ## **O R D E R** ``` A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court inKulwinder 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 inGian Singh v. State of ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :3: ``` Punjab 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 henious 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 ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :4: ``` as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more 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 in Crime No.929 of 2022 of Kodumon Police Station,Pathanamthitta,nowpendingas C.C.No.267/2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor. The offences alleged are under Section 451, 354, 354-B, 506(i), 323 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. 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. ``` ``` 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learnedcounselforthedefacto complainant/respondent no.3 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records. ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :5: ``` 5. 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 recorded over the video call was handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioner and the defacto complainant are settled and that the defacto complainant and her husband are no longer interested to proceed with the prosecution case. That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto complainant (3[rd]respondent herein) as Annexure-A3, wherein she would unequivocally state that the disputes have been amicably settled 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 bonafide. Learned counsel ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :6: ``` for the defacto complainant would also endorse that the quashment sought for can be allowed. ``` ``` 6. 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 451, 506(i), 427 and 323 are compoundable, which is all the more a reason to accept the compromise between ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :7: ``` the parties. ``` ``` In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.929/2022, and all further proceedings in C.C.No.267/2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adoor, are hereby quashed. ``` Sd/- **C. JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE.** ska ``` 2025:KER:24750 ``` Crl.M.C.No.1788 of 2025 :8: **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1788/2025` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` Annexure A1A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 929/2022 DT. 17.12.2022 Annexure A2CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.929/2022 OF KODUMON POLICE STATION ``` ``` Annexure A3NO OBJECTION AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT ```