IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 6689 OF 2024 CRIME NO.1283/2020 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.1668 OF 2023 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

VENUGOPAL S/O CHELLAPPAN, TC VII/87, KALATHIL HOUSE, NEAR SREE RAMAKRISHNA MISSION HOSPITAL, KORUTHODE LANE, KANJIRAMPARA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN – 695 030.

BY ADVS.

R.SUNIL KUMAR A.SALINI LAL JINU P. BINU RESPONDENT/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED :

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031.

2 HAFEES, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O HAMEED BAVA, RESIDING AT PNRA C 10, AZHIPURATH VEEDU, KOWDIYAR, PEERORKADA,THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT BNRA B1, LAILALAYAL, MARUTHOOR, VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695 028

3 NAGESH AGED 61 YEARS, S/O MADHU RESIDING AT SARACHAND VEEDU, SREECHITHRA NAGAR H NO.144, KOWDIAR PIPELANE ROAD, KURAVANKONAM WARD, KOWDIAR VILLAGE, PIN – 695 003

4 PRASANTH, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O P, SAMTHAKUMAR, RESIDING AT KURISHUVILAKKAM, TC 4/935, SCNRA-153, SREECHITHRA NAGGAR, KURAVANKONAM WARD, KOWDIAR VILLAGE, PIN – 695 004.

SMT. SREEJA V (PP)

SRI.S.ANIL – R2 TO R4 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

21.08.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J ......….............................................

Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2024 …................................................

Dated this the 21^st day of August, 2024 ORDER Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash all proceedings against him.

2. Petitioner is the sole accused in S.C.No.1668/2023 on the files of the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram, arising out of Crime No.1283/2020 of Peroorkada Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(ii), 427 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The second respondent is the de facto complainant and respondents 3 and 4 are victims.

3. According to the prosecution, the accused had on 15.09.2020 abused the de facto complainant and threatened to kill him and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent, 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 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. I have perused Annexure-3 to Annexure-5 affidavits filed by respondents

2 to 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavits are genuine, and de facto complainant and the other deponents 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.

8. Though the learned Public Prosecutor, submitted that, the petitioner is involved in five other cases including the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to the petitioner's involvement in the crime alleging an offence under Secti