Allowed

Biju.N.Nair v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jul 2022Crl.MC/1384/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a Criminal Misc. Case to quash an FIR under Section 498A IPC. Relying on Apex Court precedents, the court held that since the dispute was personal and settled amicably without affecting public interest, no purpose would be served in further proceedings, and the first information report was quashed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Misc. Case (Crl.M.C.No.1384 of 2022) was allowed and the Annexure 1 FIR in Crime No. 2681/2021 of Kottarakkara police station stands quashed.

Biju.N.Nair 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 29TH ASHADHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 1384 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶6

BIJU.N.NAIR AGED 47 YEARS GRACE BHAVAN, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691531 BY ADV H.PRAVEEN (KOTTARAKARA)

¶7

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI, PIN - 682031 2 GEETHA.P AGED 40 YEARS GRACE BHAVAN, VIJAYA NAGAR, PULAMON PO, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691531 BY ADV NAVANEETH D PAI

¶9

SRI P G MANU-SR PP

¶10

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

Crl.M.C.No.1384 of 2022

¶12

..2..

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash

¶15

Annexure 1 FIR in Crime No. 2681/2021 of Kottarakkara police

¶16

station on the ground of settlement between the parties.

¶17

The petitioner is the sole accused. The respondent No. 2 is the de facto complainant.

¶18

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

¶19

The respondent No. 2 entered appearance through

¶20

counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

¶21

I have heard Sri. Praveen H, the learned counsel for

¶22

the petitioner, Sri. Navaneeth, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Sri. P G Manu, the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶23

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 de

¶24

Crl.M.C.No.1384 of 2022

¶25

..3..

¶26

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.

¶27

The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], Narinder Singh and Others v. State

¶28

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.

¶29

Crl.M.C.No.1384 of 2022

¶30

..4..

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

¶32

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

¶33

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 1 FIR in Crime No. 2681/2021 of Kottarakkara police station hereby stands quashed.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

¶36

RMV

¶37

Crl.M.C.No.1384 of 2022

¶38

..5..

¶39

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1384/2022

¶40

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 A CITIZEN COPY OF THE E-FIR DATED 27/11/2021 IN CRIME NO. 2681/2021 OF KOTTARAKARA POLICE STATION Annexure2 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 09/02/2022

Biju.N.Nair v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju.N.Nair 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

Ashraf Vs Sabira

Ajimsha Vs State of Kerala

Risna Vs State of Kerala

X Vs State of Kerala

Subramanian Vs State of Kerala

A.P. Martin Vs State of Kerala