Ramzil, Nabeesa and Abdul Latheef v. State of Kerala and Salma K.K.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 780 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.2150/2017 OF Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.441 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOCHI PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ``` - **`1 RAMZIL AGED 32 YEARS S/O ABDUL LATHEEF, KADELIPARAMBU HOUSE,PERUMBADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682006`** - **`2 NABEESA AGED 50 YEARS W/O ABDUL LATHEEF, KADELIPARAMBU HOUSE,PERUMBADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682006`** - **`3 ABDUL LATHEEF AGED 52 YEARS S/O K.K.KUNJUMUHAMMED, KADELIPARAMBU HOUSE, PERUMBADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682006 BY ADVS. T.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR C.H.ABDUL RASAC AJAY ANDREWS K.C`** ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 SALMA.K.K AGED 30 YEARS D/O KAREEM.A, KUZHIKANDATHIL HOUSE, HOUSE NO.22/2517, VALUMMEL, MUNDENVELI.P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682507`** ``` BY ADVS. M.A.VAHEEDA BABU BABU KARUKAPADATH(B-13) ``` Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 -:2:- ``` P.U.VINOD KUMAR(K/647/2002) ARYA RAGHUNATH(K/000474/2018) VAISAKHI V.(K/860/2013) T.M.MUHAMMED MUSTHAQ(K/000261/2018) AJWIN P LALSON(K/001394/2018) KARUKAPADATH WAZIM BABU(MAH/8319/2019) P.LAKSHMI(K/001868/2021) AYSHA E.M.(K/001130/2022) SHIFANA KAISE(K/001171/2023) DENNIS BIJU(K/002709/2023) ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` sr pp sri c s hrithwik ``` ## **`THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON`** ``` 19.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 -:3:- Dated this the 19[th] day of March, 2024 ## **O R D E R** The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, to quash Annexure-A1 First Information Report [FIR] & Annexure-A2 Final report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.441/2018 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi.. 2. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.2150/2017 of the Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam, registered against them at the instance of the second respondent, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 354A(1) and 427 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The crux of the prosecution is that:the first petitioner was married to the second respondent on Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 ## -:4:- 18.12.2016. During the period of cohabitation, the accused had mentally harassed the second respondent, demanding more dowry. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 4. Heard; Sri.Santhosh Kumar. T.P., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. C.S. Hrithwik., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and Smt. V.A. Vaheeda Babu, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioners and the second respondent has been amicably settled out of court, and the second respondent has voluntarily executed Annexure A3 affidavit, stating that she has no objection and in all further proceedings in the above crime being quashed. Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 ## -:5:- Hence, the petition may be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Investigating Officer has ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the parties has been settled and the second respondent has voluntarily signed Annexure-A3 affidavit. 7. The learned counsel for the second respondent also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the second respondent has no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners. The said submission is recorded. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab** [2012 (10) SCC 303] and **Prabatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and another** [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that in the facts and circumstances ## Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 ## -:6:- of a case and to secure the ends of justice, where the High Court is satisfied that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and the offences are not serious in nature involving mental depravity, criminal proceedings may be quashed. 9. On a consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials on record, especially after going through Annexure-A3 affidavit sworn in by the second respondent, which has been found to be genuine and bona fide by the Investigating Officer, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court, particularly since the alleged offences are not serious in nature, no public interest is involved, the chances of conviction is remote, the continuation of the proceeding would only be wastage of judicial time and the settlement would augur harmony in society. Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 ## -:7:- Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition. In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Annexure-A1 First Information Report [FIR] & Annexure-A2 Final report in Crime No.2150/2017 of Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam and all further proceedings in C.C.No.441/2018 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, as against the petitioners. The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly. Sd/- **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** mtk/19.03.24 Crl.M.C.No.780 of 2024 -:8:- ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 780/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1TRUECOPYOFTHEFIRIN CRIME.NO.2150/2017 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, ENAKULAM DISTRICT Annexure 2TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME.NO.2150/2017 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, ENAKULAM DISTRICT Annexure 3ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ```