In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031 KANAVEETTIL UNNIKRISHNAN AGED 52 YEARS KUNHIMANGALAM AMSOM, EDANAD DESOM, PO. EDAT, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 670327 KANHIRANGADAN RAGHAVAN AGED 50 YEARS /O. THAMBAYI, PAYYANUR AMSOM DESOM, PO. PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 670307 MATHRADANVEETTIL KRISHNAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O. SANTHA, PAYYANUR AMSOM DESOM, PO. PAYYANNUR. KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 670307 P. MADHAVAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O. RAMAPODUVAL, PAYYANUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O. PAYYANUR, KANNUR DISTRICT., PIN – 670307 BRANCH MANAGER, KANNUR DISTRICT BANK, PERUMBA, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR RURAL, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 670307 BY ADV. N.G. SURENDRAN OTHER PRESENT: SRI. T.R. RANJITH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

12.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.No.1646 of 2024 -:3:- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. --------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1646 of 2024 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of March, 2024 ORDER Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.

Petitioners are accused 1 to 5 in C.C.No.204/2024 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur, arising out of Crime No.439/2023 of Payyannur Police Station, Kannur District, registered for the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 465 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondent No. 2 is the defacto complainant, while respondents 3 to are the remaining accused.

According to the prosecution, during the period of 2017-2018, the accused, with an intention to cheat the defacto complainant, created forged documents and, using the same, obtained a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- from the Bank after colluding with the Bank Manager and cheated the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences alleged.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents, 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 Crl.M.C.No.1646 of 2024 -:4:- proceedings, especially since, the petitioners are the siblings of the defacto complainant.

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

I have perused Annexure-2 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. 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 in C.C.No.204/2024 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur, are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Jka/12.03.24 Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Crl.M.C.No.1646 of 2024 -:5:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1646/2024 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure 1 Annexure-1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLIANT IN CMP DATED 29.03.2023, PREFERRED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, PAYYANNUR TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 439/2023 REGISTERED BY PAYYANUR POLICE DATED 1-4- 2023 Annexure-2 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12-2-2024