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
11 paragraphs · 240 wordsThe petitioner is the accused in Crime No.178/2021 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod District, alleging commission of offences punishable
under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the crime came to be registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the 3rd respondent and that
the entire matter stands settled as is evident from Annexure A2 affidavit executed by the 3rd respondent. It is also submitted that the offence is
compoundable with the permission of the court. But the petitioner is unable to apply for permission of the court as no final report has been filed in the
matter.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st and 2nd respondents.
In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case where the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under
Section 482 Cr.P.C can be exercised in order to secure the ends of justice. Therefore, keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another [2012(4) KLT 108] and in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat and another [(2017) 9 SCC
641], Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.178/2021 of the Hosdurg Police Station and all further proceedings will stand quashed as against the petitioner.