Sreenath v. State of Kerala & Others

## **`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. 1635 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.07/2020 OF KUZHALMANNAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 25.01.2020 IN CC NO.104 OF 2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,PALAKKAD ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCSUED:`** ``` SREENATH, AGED 29 YEARS S/O GOPALAN, NADUVIL VEEDU, PANAYOOR P.O, ATHIKKODE, COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678702 ``` ``` BY ADVS. K.N.ABHILASH SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT T.R.ANIL VENUGOPAL RITHIK S.ANAND RISHI VARMA T.R. SREELAKSHMI MENON P. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, COYALMANNAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678702`** - **`3 JASMINE AGED 31 YEARS W/O SREENATH, BISMI VEEDU, AKATHETHARA, CHEPPILAMURI, COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678002`** Crl.M.C.No.1635 of 2024 _-:2:-_ ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SR PP SMT NEEMA T V R3 BY SRI. T.J.LAKSHMANAN IYER ``` ``` 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.1635 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.104/2020 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Palakkad. 2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.7/2020 of the Kuzhalmannam Police Station, Palakkad. registered against him at the instance of the third respondent, for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code,1860. 3. The crux of the prosecution case is that: the accused was married to the third respondent. During the period of cohabitation, the accused mentally and Crl.M.C.No.1635 of 2024 _-:4:-_ physically harassed the third respondent. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences. 4. Heard; Sri. K.N.Abhilash, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.T.J.Lakshmanan Iyer, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent . 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent has been amicably settled and the third respondent has voluntarily executed Annexure-A3 affidavit, stating that she has no as subsisting grievance against the petitioner and has no objection in all further proceedings in the above crime being quashed. Hence, the petition may be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Investigating Officer has Crl.M.C.No.1635 of 2024 _-:5:-_ ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent has been amicably settled and the third respondent has voluntarily executed Annexure-A3 affidavit. 7. The learned counsel for the third respondent has also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the third respondent has no subsisting grievance as against the petitioner. 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 of the 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 offence is Crl.M.C.No.1635 of 2024 _-:6:-_ 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 third 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. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition. In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Annexure-AI First Information Report[FIR], Annexure-A2 Final report and all further proceedings Crl.M.C.No.1635 of 2024 _-:7:-_ in C.C.No.104/2020 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Palakkad, as against the petitioner. The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly. **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** rmm/19/3/2024 Crl.M.C.No.1635 of 2024 _-:8:-_ ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1635/2024`** |**`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`**|**`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`**| |---|---| |**`Annexure A1`**|**`THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO-`**| ||**`07/2020 DATED 02.01.2020 OF THE`**| ||**`COYALMANNAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD`**| ||**`DISTRICT ALONG WITH FIS`**| |**`Annexure A2`**|**`THE CERTIFIED COPY OF CHARGE SHEET NO.`**| ||**`25/2020 DATED 25-01-2020 IN C.C. NO.`**| ||**`104/2020 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS`**| ||**`MAGISTRATE- I, PALAKKAD ALONG WITH MEMO`**| ||**`OF EVIDENCE`**| |**`Annexure A3`**|**`THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD`**| ||**`RESPONDENT DATED 07-02-2024`**|