Favasil v. State of Kerala

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1941** ## **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 489/2016 OF SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, MANJERI** **CRIME NO.740/2014 OF Thenhipalam Police Station , Malappuram** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **FAVASIL AGED 28 YEARS S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, AMBALACHERI HOUSE, PERUVALLOOR AMSOM, PARAMBILPEEDIKA.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT676317** **BY ADVS. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN SRI.M.KIRANLAL SRI.T.S.SARATH SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA) AJAY JAYACHANDRAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION OF TENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT673636** **3 RASHEEDA AGED 24 YEARS D/O.RAFEEK, KALLINGAL HOUSE, K.PURAM(P.O), ATHALLOOR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676302** **R3 BY ADV. ANSU VARGHESE** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 2 ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------Crl.M.C.No. 6949 of 2019** **---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 28[th] day of October, 2019** ## **O R D E R** The case projected in this Crl.M.C. filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C reads as follows. The petitioner is the sole accused in the Crime No. 740/2014 of Tenhipalam Police Station, Malappuram District now pending as S.C No. 489/2016 on the files of Sessions Court, Manjeri registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7 and 8 of POCSO Act. As per the allegations, the 3[rd] respondent/de facto complainant was treated with cruelty by the petitioner/sole accused by demanding more dowry and misappropriated gold and money entrusted to the petitioner/sole accused for the wellbeing of the 3[rd] respondent/de-facto complainant. It is further alleged that the petitioner/sole accused sexually assaulted the minor daughter having 5 months of age on 05.12.2014 at 11 am. The case as per Anx-A1 FIR was registered in connection with the misunderstanding happened between the **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 3 petitioner/sole accused and 3[rd] respondent/de-facto complainant and out of their marital discords. Now the differences of opinion and misunderstandings between the petitioner/sole accused and 3[rd] respondent/de facto complainant were sorted out and the disputes settled. The 3[rd] respondent/de facto complainant has given his no objection in quashing the Anx. A1 FIR and Anx.A2 final report in the form of Anx.A3 affidavit. It is in the lights of these facts and circumstances that the petitioner has filed the instant Crl.M.C. with the following prayers: “ _1. To quash Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.740/2014 of Tenhipalam Police Station, Malappuram District now pending as S.C.No.489/2016 on the files on Sessions Court, Manjeri and all proceedings arising therefrom._ _2. Issue such other orders or directions which deems necessary for the ends of justice and in the circumstances of the case.”_ 2. The main contentions urged by the petitioner are as follows:- The case as per Anx-A1 FIR was registered in connection with the misunderstanding happened between the petitioner/sole accused and 3[rd] respondent/de-facto complainant and out of their marital discords. Now the differences of opinion and misunderstandings between the petitioner/sole accused and the 3[rd] respondent/de-facto **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 4 complainant were sorted out and the disputes have been settled. The 3[rd] respondent/de-facto complainant has given her no-objection in quashing Anx-A1 FIR and Anx-A2 final report in the form of Anx- A3 affidavit. The rival parties have settled the disputes between them as per Anx-A3 affidavit and buried the hatchet and that the continuance of the criminal proceedings in Anx-A1 FIR & Anx-A2 Final report will be a futile exercise and mere wastage of precious time of the Court as well as investigating agencies since the trial in the matter is yet to start. 3. Heard Sri.Manu Ramachandran the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused, Sri.T.R.Renjith, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents 1 & 2 and Sri.Ansu Varghese, the learned Advocate appearing for the 3[rd] respondent lady defacto complainant. 4. It is now submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and the learned counsel for the defacto complainant that the above said criminal proceedings have arisen from the context of marital discords between them and that now they have fully resolved the disputes and that they are decided to part away and the 3[rd] respondent has filed an affidavit as per Anx.A3, **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 5 stating that the above said allegations have been made by her in the context of the family disputes between the parties and that she has no further interest to prosecute the matter and that the marital relationship with the petitioner has been now dissolved and that she has married another person. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor got instruction from the Investigating Officer and today when this matter has been taken for consideration, the learned Prosecutor would submit that the I.O. has conducted an enquiry and has already taken statement from the 3[rd] respondent wherein she has stated that the factual aspects stated by her in Anx.A3 affidavit regarding the settlement and got remarried etc., are correct. 6. 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 **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 6 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 _**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. 7. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the impugned Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.740/2014 of Tenhipalam Police Station, Malappuram, which led to the institution of Anx.A2 in S.C.No. 489/2016 on the file of the Sessions Court, Manjeri and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused will stand quashed. 8. 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 **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 7 order to the Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information. With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of. **Sd/-** Dxy **ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** **Crl.MC.No.6949 OF 2019(G)** 8 ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.740/2014 OF TENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.740/2014 OF TENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT NOW PENDING AS SC NO.489/2016 ON THE FILES OF SESSIONS COURT, MANJERI ANNEXURE A3 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 17.09.2019 SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT**