This Criminal Miscellaneous Case concerns the quashing of an FIR under sections 406, 418, and 420 read with section 34 of the IPC regarding an investment dispute. The court allowed the petition, observing that the dispute was private and the parties had settled the matter.
Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.345/2020 and all further proceedings therein are quashed.
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 ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
CRL.MC NO. 3295 OF 2020
CRIME NO.345/2020 OF FORT COCHIN POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2:
1YAHIYA A. K.
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O. KHALID, ARIKKINATT HOUSE,
PULLARDESOM ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI - 682 006.
2SHAMEENA YAHIYA
AGED 37 YEARS
W/O. YAHIYA A. K., ARIKKINATT HOUSE,
PULLARDESOM ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI - 682 006.
BY ADVS.
SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL
SMT.TINU JOHNSON
SHRI.VISHNU DAS
SRI. SRUTHI DAS
SHRI.PHILIP ARUN M.N.
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER FORT KOCHI POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.3 DIANA MARY CANE AGED 47 YEARS THE FARROUS MAIDSTONE, KENT, ENGLAND, NOW RESIDING AT NIRVANA INN, LIG-6, FORTNAGAR, FORT COCHIN, COCHIN - 682 001.CRL.MC NO. 3295 OF 2020
2
BY ADV
SRI.MANU ROY
PP - SRI.ARAVIND V. MATHEW.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 3295 OF 2020
3
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused in No.345 of 2020 of Fort Cochin Police Station. This Crl.M.C. is filed by them seeking to quash Annexure A1 First Information Report in the aforesaid crime which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418, 420 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
matter has already been settled between the parties and he brought my attention to Annexure A3 affidavit filed in support of the same. A perusal of Annexure A3 would indicate that, the de facto complainant had acknowledged the matter of settlement and also conveyed her no objection in quashing further proceedings in the aforesaid crime. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant also acknowledges the same.
4
CRL.MC NO. 3295 OF 2020
nature, the settlement entered into by the said parties can be accepted for the purpose of invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Apart from the above, consequent to the aforesaid settlement, no purpose would be served in allowing the investigation to continue.
In such circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.345/2020 of Fort Cochin Police Station and all further proceedings therein are hereby quashed.
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
scs
CRL.MC NO. 3295 OF 2020
5
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3295/2020
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.345/2019 OF FORT COCHIN POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PENDING ON
THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, MATTANCHERRY.
ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIS IN CRIME
NO.345/2019 OF FORT COCHIN POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PENDING ON
THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, MATTANCHERRY.
ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER
DATED 14.07.2020.
ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN SATISHCHANDRA
RATANLAL SHAH V. STATE OF GUJARAT
(2019(1) KLT O ONLINE 3087 (SC)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the First Information Report regarding sections 406, 418, 420 IPC can be quashed upon settlement.
Whether further proceedings in the FIR serve any purpose after a private settlement.
Whether the dispute in this Crl.M.C.is purely private in nature.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v. State of GujaratReferred¶37
(2019(1) KLT O ONLINE 3087 (SC))
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Yahiya A.K.
Shameena Yahiya
State of Kerala
Diana Mary Cane
Ziyad Rahman A.A.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court