Allowed

Sheghil S.P v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Jan 2023Crl.MC/140/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal Miscellaneous petition to quash criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC. Relying on settled law, the Court held that since the parties settled the personal dispute and no public interest was adversely affected, the Final Report was quashed.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Misc. Case No. 140 of 2023 allowed; Annexure A Final Report in C.C.No.23/2020 quashed.

Sheghil S.P Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

CRL.MC NO. 140 OF 2023

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH MONDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 26TH POUSHA, 1944

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 140 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.711/2019 OF Koyilandy Police Station, Kozhikode
AGAINST CC 23/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -

¶7

I,KOYILANDY

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

SHEGHIL S.P,
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O SASIDHARAN, SREELAKSHMI HOUSE,
CHELIYA P.O., CHERUVAKKADU,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673306
BY ADV R.RANJITH (MANJERI)

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

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

¶12

2SHILPA
AGED 30 YEARS
D/O. SATHYASEELAN,
SHILPA NIVAS, ELATHUR VILLAGE, ERANIHIKKAL P.O.
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. , PIN – 673303

¶13

R1 BY SRI.P.G.MANU-SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
R2 BY ADV A.P.NIDHIN KUMAR

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

CRL.MC NO. 140 OF 2023

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A Final

¶19

Report in C.C.No.23/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandy on the ground of settlement between

¶20

the parties.

¶21

The petitioner is the accused. The 2^nd respondent is the de facto complainant.

¶22

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

¶23

The respondent No.2 entered appearance through

¶24

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

¶25

I have heard Sri.R.Ranjith, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.A.P.Nidhin Kumar, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri.P.G.Manu, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

¶26

The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit

¶27

sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire

¶28

CRL.MC NO. 140 OF 2023

¶29

¶30

dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the 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.

¶31

The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012

¶32

(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.

¶33

The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by

¶34

CRL.MC NO. 140 OF 2023

¶35

¶36

quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure A Final Report. The offence in question does not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra).

¶37

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 A Final Report in C.C.No.23/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate

¶38

Court, Koyilandy hereby stands quashed.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE

¶41

¶42

CRL.MC NO. 140 OF 2023

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 140/2023

¶45

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶46

Annexure ACERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT
Annexure BTRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶47

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL

Sheghil S.P v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheghil S.P 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

Dhanesh Padmanabhan Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Althaf Vs State of Kerala

Hareesh Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Riyas Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh V.S Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf Kurikkal @ Muthu Vs State of Kerala