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
9 paragraphs · 301 wordsPetition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 230 of 2013 of Mankada Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, now pending as L.P. No. 1 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Perinthalmanna.
Heard both sides and perused the records.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the parties have resolved the entire dispute among themselves and there is no subsisting dispute between them. Therefore, this petition to quash the entire proceedings in L.P. No. 1 of 2017.
Learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent/defacto complainant has submitted that she has absolutely no grievance or complaint against the petitioner. Annexure B, the affidavit sworn to by her, indicates that she has no intention to pursue the matter further.
The learned Public Prosecutor has reported that the prosecution has no serious objection in allowing the petition.
As the dispute has been amicably settled, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak.
Therefore, considering the special facts and circumstances involved in this case, I find that no fruitful purpose is likely to be served by proceeding with the matter against the petitioner. Moreover, no public interest is involved in the case and there is no legal impediment in granting the prayer as sought for by the petitioner. Therefore, for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, this Crl.M.C. is only to be allowed.
For the foregoing reasons, all further proceedings in L.P. No. 1 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Perinthalmanna arising from Crime No.230 of 2013 of Mankada Police Station, will stand quashed as prayed for.