Quashed

Wilfred Jose @ Williams v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Sept 2020Crl.MC/5852/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed the FIR against the petitioner in a cheating case. The court found a real settlement between the parties and held that continuing the prosecution would only waste time, applying Supreme Court principles to accord relief in the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned FIR in Crime No.946/2016 and all further proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.

Wilfred Jose @ Williams Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 18TH BHADRA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.5852 OF 2017

¶6

CRIME NO.946/2016 OF Vellarada Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

WILFRED JOSE @ WILLIAMS ANITHA VILASOM, AARATRTUKUZHI, KOOTHALI.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-31.

¶12

2 SHILAJA D/O.SANTHA,MANJU BHAVAN,VATTUKUTHI,KOOTHALI.P.O,VELLARADA,NEYYATTINK ARA.

¶13

R1-BY SRI.SAIGY J.PALATTY R2 BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶18

==================

¶19

Crl.M.C.No. 5852 of 2017

¶20

==================

¶21

Dated this the 9^th day of September, 2018 O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner herein is the sole accused in the impugned Anx-A

¶23

FIR in Crime No.946/2016 of Vellarada Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Secs.406, 420 and 34 of the I.P.C. on the basis of the complaint of the 2^nd respondent defacto complainant. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent de facto complainant have been settled amicably 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.

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.M.C.5852/2017 - : 3 :-

¶26

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.

¶27

Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the impugned Anx-A FIR in Crime No.946/2016 of Vellarada Police Station and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused will stand quashed.

¶28

The petitioner will produce certified copy of this order before the court below concerned for necessary information.

¶29

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

¶30

Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶31

sdk+

¶32

Crl.M.C.5852/2017 - : 4 :-

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.946/2016 OF VELLARADA POLICE STATION DATED 26.8.2016.

Wilfred Jose @ Williams v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wilfred Jose @ Williams v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Unni a Vs State of Kerala

Antony Vs State of Kerala

Kulsam Beevi Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Thajudheen @ Thaju Vs State of Kerala

Unnikuttan Vs Mini a O

Pradeep Rana Vs State of Kerala