✦ Kerala High Court

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

Key paragraphs

  • Para 66. 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…
  • Para 99. Accordingly, Annexures A3 FIR and A4 final report, and all proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.431 of 2023 before the CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 5 Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur, arising out of Crime No.89 of 2023 of Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur…

Judgment

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI, PIN - 682031 HAREENDRAN, AGED 60 YEARS S/O.UNNIKRISHNA MENON, VALAPPIKKAVINAL HOUSE (ANJALI HOUSE), NETTISSERY P.O, THRISSUR, PIN - 680651 S.I OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR, PIN - 680651 MADHAVAN, AGED 75 YEARS S/O. ACHUTHAN NAIR, PARACKAL HOUSE, MUKKATTUKARA DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 651 CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 2 5 REMADEVI, AGED 50 YEARS W/O. HARIDAS, ORAYAMPURATH HOUSE, NETTISSERY DESOM, NETTISSERY VILLAGE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680651 BY SRI. ASHI M.C., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BY ADV.MENINO FUTO THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

22.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 3 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Crl.M.C.No.5341 of 2024 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2024 ORDER Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against him.

2.

Petitioner is the 2nd accused in C.C.No.431 of 2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur, arising out of Crime No.89 of 2023 of Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur, registered for offences under Sections 406 and 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondents 2, 4 and 5 are the defacto complainants.

3.

According to the prosecution, the accused who is the office bearer of a Temple Advisory Committee, collected deposits from the devotees and other people including respondents 2, 4 and 5, for developing the temple, and failed to repay the amount, and thereby cheated the depositors and committed the offences alleged.

4.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioner ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 4 offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

6.

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].

7.

Though the learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that there are five other crimes pending against the petitioner, I am of the view that since the case against accused 1 and 2 in the same crime have already been quashed by this Court in Crl.M.C.No.7602 of 2023, no purpose would be achieved by continuing the prosecution against the petitioner.

8.

I have perused Annexures A6, A8 and A10 affidavits filed by respondents 2, 4 and 5. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and respondents 2, 4 and 5 stand 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.

9.

Accordingly, Annexures A3 FIR and A4 final report, and all proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.431 of 2023 before the CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 5 Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur, arising out of Crime No.89 of 2023 of Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. RKM Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5341/2024 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES : Annexure A1 Annexure A2 Annexure A3 Annexure A4 Annexure A5 Annexure A6 Annexure A7 Annexure A8 Annexure A9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 27.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER OF COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13.07.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF ERSTWHILE TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR NO.89/2023 IN CRIME NO.89/2023 OF MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III, THRISSUR THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/ CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE SI OF POLICE, MANNUTHY POLICE STATION IN CC NO.431/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-III, THRISSUR THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 23.02.2023 EXECUTED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AFTER RECEIVING THE AMOUNT DUE TO HIM THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2 ND RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EXECUTED BY THE 4 TH RESPONDENT ON 23.02.2023 WHEN HE RECEIVED THE MONEY DUE TO HIM THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 4 TH RESPONDENT THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 23.02.2023 EXECUTED BY THE 5 TH RESPONDENT WHEN SHE RECEIVED MONEY DUE TO HER FROM THE TEMPLE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CRL.MC NO. 5341 OF 2024 7 Annexure A10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 5 TH RESPONDENT Annexure A11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2024 IN CRL.M.C. 7602/2023 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Kerala High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments