This single bench criminal miscellaneous petition sought quashment of FIR under Section 498A IPC based on a settlement between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. The High Court found a real settlement and allowed quashment.
The impugned FIR and all further proceedings arising therefrom were quashed in the interest of justice.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1941
Crl.MC.No.2210 OF 2019(E)
CC 1402/2015 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
CRIME NO.46/2015 OF Poojappura Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
1 NOUFALSHA,AGED 32 YEARS S/O.SHAMSUDEEN, VALIYA VILA VEEDU, EROOR PANCHAYATH, PATHADI DESOM, THOTTAMUKKU, NEAR EROOR MARTHOMA CHURCH, TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADVS. SRI.G.RANJU MOHAN SRI.V.G.JAYAGOPAN SMT.M.SANTHI (K/868/2011)
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2 FEBIN SHAMS,AGED 30 YEARS D/O.SHAMSUDEEN, RESIDING IN HOUSE NO.12, MUDAVANMUGAL, GREENDALE VILLAS, POOJAPPURA.P.O, TRIVANDRUM-695012.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.PRIYA SHANAVAS, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1, SRI.ASHIQ K.MOHAMMED FOR R2
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.2210/2019
2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
Crl.M.C.No. 2210 of 2019
Dated this the 8th day of August, 2019
ORDER
The petitioner herein is the accused in the impugned Anx-A1 FIR in Crime No.46/2015 of Poojappura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District, registered for offence punishable under Sec.498A of I.P.C, which has been registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant, which has led to the institution of Anx-A2 Final Report in C.C.No.1402/2015 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant have been settled amicably and that the 2nd respondent has sworn to Anx-A3 affidavit before this Court, wherein it is stated that she has settled the entire disputes with the petitioner and that she has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner. It is in the light of these aspects that the petitioner has preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with the prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against him.
Crl.M.C.No.2210/2019
3
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 affidavits 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.
The petitioner will produce certified copy of this order before the court below concerned as well as the Investigating officer concerned. The office of the Advocate General will also forward a certified copy of this
Crl.M.C.No.2210/2019 4
order to the Investigating Officer concerned.
With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
acd
Crl.M.C.No.2210/2019
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| ANNEXURE A1 | CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.46/2015 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2 | CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.46/2015 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION. |
| ANNEXURE A3 | THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN THE ABOVE CRIME |
| True Copy | |
| P.S. To Judge. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC can be quashed upon settlement between the parties.
Whether Section 482 of the CrPC applies to non-compoundable offences like the present one in case of settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabApplied¶24
2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anrApplied¶24
(2014) 6 SCC 466 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
NOUFALSHA
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
FEBIN SHAMS
ALEXANDER THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
