In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab

THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2. SHAJU P.M AGED 61 YEARS S/O. P.C.MATHAI, MADOTHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PIRAVOM PO, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 686664 OTHER PRESENT: SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

22.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 3523 OF 2023 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ==================== Crl.M.C.No.3523 of 2023 ===================== Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2024 ORDER Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.

Petitioners 1 and 2 are the accused in C.C.No.17/2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class magistrate Court, Piravam, registered for the offences under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant.

According to the prosecution, the accused had, on 02.02.2018, stole the debit card details of the defacto complainant by manipulating electronic technology and withdrew money from the account of the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences alleged.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the respondent apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

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 CRL.MC NO. 3523 OF 2023 3 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 Annexure A3 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.

Though the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the 1 st accused is involved in seven other crimes and the 2nd accused is involved in four crimes, considering the dates on which those crimes were committed and the nature of allegations in the present case, apart from the settlement arrived at between the parties, there is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners C.C.No.17/2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class magistrate Court, Piravam are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS sd/ JUDGE jm/ CRL.MC NO. 3523 OF 2023 4 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3523/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A-1 Annexure A-2 Annexure A-3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 285/2018 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION. A COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 30.06.2018 IN CRIME NO. 285 OF 2018 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION. ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NO.285 OF 2018 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION IN ERNAKULAM RURAL.