Nasid vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash all proceedings against them.

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.708/2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Varkala registered for the offences under Sections 120B, 406, 420 and r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Sections 17 and 18 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958. The 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant. It is submitted that the matter has been settled and the criminal proceedings against the petitioners may be quashed.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the defacto complainant apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(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  v. State of Punjab [(2014 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

I have perused the affidavit filed by the 2nd 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. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility. Further, there is no impediment for granting the prayer too.

Accordingly, all proceedings in C.C.No.708/2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Varkala, are quashed.

This Crl.M.C.is allowed.