Vipin V vs State Of Kerala

Dr Kauser Edappagath, J

This  Crl.M.C.  has  been  preferred  to  quash  Annexure  Al FIR  in Crime  No.96/2021 of Mannanthala  Police  Station  on  the  ground of settlement between the parties.

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1  to 3. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.

The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 498A and 323 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(s) of the  Schedule  Caste  and  Schedule  Tribes  (Prevention  of Atrocities  Act), 1989.

The  respondent  No.2  entered  appearance  through  counsel.  An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced.

I have heard Smt.K.K.Raziya, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.M.Chandralekha, the learned counsel for the respondent  No.2 and  Smt.T.V.Neema, the  learned  Senior  Public Prosecutor.

The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by the respondent No.2  would show that the entire dispute between  the  parties  has  been  amicably  settled  and  the  de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings 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  4661  and  in  State  of Madhya Pradesh  v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019)  5  SCC 6881  has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.0 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 the 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  Al FIR. 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 Larrni Narayan (supra).

For the  reasons  stated  above,  I  am of the view that no  purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Accordingly,  the  Crl.M.C.  is  allowed.  Annexure  Al FIR in  Crime No.95/2021  of Mannanthala Police Station hereby stands quashed.