Eldho Alias Vs State of Kerala

¶1

2025:KER:22711

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶6

CRL.MC NO. 8215 OF 2024

¶7

CRIME NO.1245/2019 OF NEDUMBASSERY POLICE STATION, Ernakulam

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.813 OF 2020 OF JUDICIAL FIRST

¶9

CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, ANGAMALY

¶10

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶11

ELDHO ALIAS

¶12

AGED 34 YEARS

¶13

S/O P.I. ALIAS, NAMBIRATH, NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE, MALIKAD,
ALUVA ERAKULAM, PIN - 683589

¶14

BY ADV K.P.DHANEESH

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶16

1STATE OF KERALA

¶17

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

¶18

2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN
- 683111

¶19

3 SUSHMITHA

¶20

AGED 26 YEARS

¶21

W/O. SUBHASH, AZHEEKKAL KADAVIL HOUSE, THURTHUSSERY KARA,
NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE, NEDUMBASSERY AIRPORT, ERAKULAM RURAL
(RESIDING NOW AT UMMAPUTHEN PARAMBIL(H), NEDUMBASSERY P.O,
ERNAKULAM), PIN - 683585

¶22

SRI. C.N. PRABHAKARAN (SR.PP)
R3-SMT.MAYA .M

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024 2025:KER:22711 - 2 -

¶25

C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶26

------------------------------------
 Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024

¶27

------------------------------------
Dated, this the 07th day of March, 2025

¶28

ORDER

¶29

A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High
Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of
Punjab and Another [(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad
guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal
proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect
of offences which are not compoundable in terms of
Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was
that the offences against human body, other than
murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be
compounded, when the court is in a position to record
a finding that the settlement between the parties is
voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with
approval by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and
another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in Narinder
Singh and Others v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC
466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the

¶30

Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024 2025:KER:22711 - 3 -

¶31

extent of sanctioning invocation of the inherent
power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure
Code to quash the F.I.R. in a crime alleging offence
under Section 307, which is a heinous and serious
offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the
Hon'ble Supreme in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of
Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in
respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc.,
the relevant findings of which are extracted
herebelow:

¶32

“6.We need to emphasise that it is perhaps
advisable that in disputes where the question
involved is of a purely personal nature, the
court should ordinarily accept the terms of
the compromise even in criminal proceedings as
keeping the matter alive with no possibility
of a result in favour of the prosecution is a
luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened
as they are, cannot afford and that the time
so saved can be utilised in deciding more
effective and meaningful litigation. This is a
common sense approach to the matter based on
ground of realities and bereft of the
technicalities of the law.”

¶33

2.In the facts at hand, petitioner is the 2nd

¶34

Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024 2025:KER:22711 - 4 -

¶35

accused in Crime No.1245/2019 of Nedumbassery Police
Station, Ernakulam, now pending as C.C.No.813/2020
before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,
Angamaly. As per the final report, the offences
alleged are under Sections 384, 201 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code. The petitioner seeks quashment of
entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on the
strength of the settlement arrived at by and between
the parties.

¶36

3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned counsel for the defacto complainant/3rd
respondent and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
Perused the records.

¶37

4.When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed
to record the statement of the defacto complainant.
The said direction was complied and the statement was
handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that
the issues between the petitioner and the defacto
complainant are settled amicably and that she is not
interested to proceed further with the prosecution
case, as against the petitioner. That apart, it is

¶38

Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024 2025:KER:22711 - 5 -

¶39

noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an affidavit
has been sworn to by the defacto complainant (3rd
respondent herein) as Annexure-2, wherein she would
unequivocally state that the disputes have been
amicably settled and that the complaint emanated from
certain misunderstandings. The defacto complainant
would also swear that she has no grievance against
the petitioner and has no objection in quashing the
proceedings against the petitioner. The affidavit is
sworn to on her own volition, without any compulsion,
whatsoever. This Court, is therefore, convinced that
the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide.
Learned Counsel for the 3rd
respondent/defacto complainant would also endorse
that the quashment sought for can be allowed.

¶40

5.In the light of the above referred facts, this
Court is of the opinion that the necessary
parameters, as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra),
Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and Gian Singh (Supra), are
fully satisfied. This Court is convinced that further
proceedings against the petitioner will be a futile

¶41

Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024 2025:KER:22711 - 6 -

¶42

exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been
settled. There is little possibility of any
conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement
arrived at by and between the parties, if they are
compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the same,
in the estimation of this Court, will amount to abuse
of process of Court. The quashment sought for would
secure the ends of justice.

¶43

In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed.
Annexure-1 Final Report in Crime no.1245/2019 and all
further proceedings in C.C.No.813/2020 of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Angamaly, as
against the petitioner are hereby quashed. The 1st
accused is no more, wherefore, the case against him
will stand abated.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

ska

¶48

Crl.M.C.No.8215 of 2024

¶49

2025:KER:22711

¶50

7 -

¶51

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8215/2024

¶52

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶53

Annexure 1TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1245
OF 2019 OF NEDUMBASSERY POLICE STATION,
ERANAKULAM RURAL

¶54

Annexure 2THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 30.09.2024

¶55

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL

¶56

TRUE COPY

¶57

P.A. TO JUDGE

Eldho Alias v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eldho Alias v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hudaifa C.H, Vs State of Kerala

Sibi.v.T Vs State of Kerala

Ajmal Sha O.S Vs State of Kerala

Vikraman Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

Mr. Muhammed Shajil Ayyoth Vs State of Kerala