Allowed

Shameer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jul 2022Crl.MC/1186/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash the Final Report in a case registered under Section 498 A IPC. Finding that the dispute was purely personal and amicably settled, the court invoked Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The Crl.M.C. is allowed; the Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.205/2020 pending as C.C.No.1116/2020 stands quashed.

Shameer Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF JULY 2022 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1186 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.205/2020 OF Infopark Police Station, Ernakulam CC 1116/20 OF JFCM, KAKKANNAD

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 SHAMEER, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O SULAIMAN ARAYIDATH HOUSE, EDACHIRA P.O, LUCO COLONY, KAKKANAD, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

¶9

2 JAMEELA, AGED 61 YEARS W/O SULAIMAN, ARAYIDATH HOUSE, EDACHIRA P.O, LUCO COLONY, KAKKANAD VILLAGE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

¶10

BY ADV SHEEBA MARIAM. J.

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶13

2 SUNITHA, AGED 31 YEARS, D/O ALI. K.M, ARAYIDATH HOUSE, LUCO COLONY, NOW RESIDING AT KUTTAKKADU HOUSE, KANNOTHAMBALAM ROAD, MUPPATHADAM ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683110

¶14

BY SRI. P.G. MANU, SR. PP

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.1186/2022

-:2:-

O R D E R

Dated this the 21^st day of July, 2022

¶20

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.205/2020 of Infopark Police Station now

¶21

pending as C.C.No.1116/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad on the ground of settlement between the parties.

¶22

The petitioners are the accused. The 2^nd respondent is the defacto complainant.

¶23

The offence alleged against the petitioners is punishable under Section 498 A of IPC.

¶24

The respondent No.2 entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

¶25

I have heard Smt. Sheeba Mariam.J, the learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri. P.G. Manu, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

¶26

The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the

¶27

Crl.M.C.No.1186/2022

¶28

-:3:-

¶29

de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was amicably settled.

¶30

The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.

¶31

The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2. The

¶32

Crl.M.C.No.1186/2022

¶33

-:4:-

¶34

offence in question does not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the

¶35

Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra).

¶36

For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.205/2020 of Infopark Police Station now pending as C.C.No.1116/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate

¶37

Court, Kakkanad hereby stands quashed.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

Crl.M.C.No.1186/2022