Ajesh vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against him.

Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.2203/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungalloor, arising out of Crime No.1244/2021 of Kodungalloor Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The 3rd respondent is the defacto complainant.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioner ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another  [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the petitioner is involved in twelve criminal cases, which are as follows :

Sl.

No.

Crime No.

Sections

Act

Police Station

1.

465/2022

448,   427,   294(b)

and 506

Indian           Penal Code, 1860

Kodungallur

2.

672/2018

143, 147, 188, 283

r/w149

IPC

Mathilakam

117(e)

Kerala Police Act

4(1), 6(i)

Kerala         Public Ways    Restriction of Assemblies  and Procession      Act, 2011

3.

390/2015

143,147,148,

324,308  r/w149

IPC

Mathilakam

4.

890/2018

143,147,188,   283

r/w 149

IPC

Kodungallur

4(1) r/w 6(i)

Kerala         Public Ways    Restriction of   Assemblies   of Procession      Act, 2011

5.

830/2018

294(b), 506(i)

IPC

120(o)

KP

Mathilakam

6.

636/2021

448,  394(b),  341,

323 r/w 34

IPC

Kodungallur

7.

1244/2021

341, 323, 324

IPC

Kodungallur

8.

330/2023

118(a)

KP

Kodungallur

9.

331/2022

323, 324

IPC

Mathilakam

10.

612/2022

448, 341, 323, 427

IPC

Mathilakam

11.

101/2019

143,     147,     148,

341,     323,     324,

308,           294(b),

506(i) r/w149

IPC

Kodungallur

12.

809/2011

341,     323,     324, 354r/w34

IPC

Mathilakam

I have perused Annexure-A3 affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the defacto complainant stands by the contents thereof. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.

Even though the petitioner is involved in twelve other cases, considering the fact that the present dispute has been settled with the defacto complainant and no public interest is involved in this case, I am of the view that there is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing and the continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility. Hence, I am of the view that the proceedings can be quashed on the basis of the said settlement.

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.2203/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungalloor, arising out of Crime No.1244/2021 of Kodungalloor Police Station, are quashed.

This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.