AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
20 paragraphs · 371 wordsDr. Kauser Edappagath, J
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure I FIR in Crime No. 890/2021 of Ernakulam Town North Police Station on the ground of
settlement between the parties.
The petitioner is the defacto complainant.  The 2nd respondent is the accused.
The offence alleged against the 2nd respondent are under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 of IPC
I have heard Smt. K.V. Bhadra Kumari, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. M.P. Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor.
The averments in the petition would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto
complainant/petitioner has decided not to proceed with the crime 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.
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 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 ends of
justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.
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 I. The offences in question do 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).
For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is
allowed. Annexure I FIR in Crime No. 890/2021 of Ernakulam Town North Police Station stands hereby quashed.
