Mohammed Thaseem N.T. and Mohammed Rishad M.P. v. The Sub Inspector of Police, Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram District; State of Kerala represented by the Public Prosecutor; Victim (Rasha); De facto Complainant (Hussain)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1941** **Crl.MC.No.8180 OF 2019(B)** **CRIME NO.38/2019 OF Manjeri Police Station , Malappuram** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** - **1 MOHAMMED THASEEM N.T. AGED 22 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED N T., NARANGATHODI HOUSE, MANJERI P.O. MALAPPURAM 676 122.** - **2 MUHAMMED RISHAD M.P. AGED 21 YEARS S/O. ABDULLA, 7/1001, MANJAPPULLIYAM HOUSE, CHEPPOOR, ANAKKAYAM P.O. MALAPPURAM 676 509.** ## **BY ADV. SHRI.ANIL KUMAR K.P.** **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE AND VICTIM AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** - **1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANJERI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -676 509.** - **2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.** - **3 VICTIM** Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 2 **4 HUSSAIN, AGED 50 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED, VALLANCHIRA HOUSE, CHETTIYANGADI, KARUVAMBRAM P.O. MANJERI, MALAPPURAM 676 123.** **BY ADV.** **SMT.T.J.SEEMA-R3 SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 3 ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 -----------------------------------Dated this the 20[th] day of November, 2019 ## **O R D E R** The facts projected in this Crl.MC filed under Sec.482 is as follows. 2. The petitioners herein are the Accused Nos.1 and 2 in crime No.38/2019 of Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram, registered for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Secs.363, 366A read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.18 read with Sec.7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. That the first information statement was given by the father Hussain of the victim Rasha, aged 17 years, who is studying in Plus-one in Manjeri Higher Secondary School. She was found missing at school by noon so at 4.20 p.m., this was reported to Manjeri Police Station, based on which first information report No.38/2019 was laid under Sec.57 of Kerala Police Act. Later on 16-01-2019 the 1[st] respondent police filed petition before the Judicial 1[st] Class Magistrate Court-I, Manjeri praying permission of this Court to alter to Sec.366(A) read with Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 4 Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.18 read with Sec.7 of the Protection of Children from sexual offences Act. The 1[st] petitioner (accused No.1) persuaded her by giving promise to marry her and on 14-01-2019 at 11.30 a.m., took her in car bearing Regn. No. KL-10-AM-3374 to Shornur with the help of the 2[nd] petitioner (2[nd] accused) and from there in train and bus to Bangalore thereby committed the abovesaid offences. 3. It is humbly submitted that the petitioners have settled the subject matter of the case with the 3[rd] and 4[th] respondents herein who are the victim and defacto complainant respectively, in the presence of respectable mediators. The parties have decided to approach this Court for quashing the first information report. The 3[rd] and 4[th] respondents have agreed for a premature termination of the proceedings as against the petitioners, and to that effect they have filed an affidavit along with this petition before this Court. The petitioners submit that the settlement was voluntary and without any compulsion from any persons. Even if an elaborate trial is conducted no purpose is going to be achieved. It is in the light of these averments and contentions, the petitioners have filed instant Crl.M.C with the following prayers: Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 5 _"..........to quash Anx.I First information report along with the petition dated 16-01-2019 to alter the section filed by the 1[st] respondent against the petitioners in Cr No.38/2019 of Manjeri Police Station, (pending before the District and Sessions Court, Manjeri), in the interest of justice."_ 4. Heard Sri.K.P.Anil Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri.Snthosh Peter, the learned Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Smt.T.J.Seema, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4. 5. The learned Prosecutor was requested to get instructions in the matter and now when the matter was taken up for consideration, it is submitted that the Investigating Officer has enquired into the matter and also recorded the statements of R3 and R4, wherein they are stated that the entire disputes with the petitioners have been resolved and that they are no longer interested to continue the impugned criminal proceedings and this Court may quash the impugned criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement and that the factual aspects stated in Anxs.2 and 3 affidavits sworn to by them are correct. 6. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 6 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 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 Anx.I FIR in Crime No.38 of 2019 of Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram district, and all further proceedings arising Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 7 therefrom pending against the accused persons will stand quashed. 8. The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order before Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below concerned. The office of the Advocate General will forward copy of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned for information. With these observations and directions, the Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of. Sd/- ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE** KAS Crl.M.C. No. 8180 of 2019 8 ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE I** **TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT PETITION TO ALTER THE SECTION DATED 16.1.2019.** **ANNEXURE II** **TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17.11.2019.** **ANNEXURE III** **TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVITS SWORN IN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 17.11.2019.**