Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Ziyad Rahman A. A, J
Felics Joseph, – Appellant
Versus
DR.MEGHA.M – Respondent
Crl.MC/6263/2022
Quashing - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code Sections 294(b), 354A, 509 & Kerala Health Care Services Act Section 4 - The court quashed the FIR based on private settlement following the principles established in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, noting that no productive purpose would be served by continuing prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner faced prosecution for alleged offenses including verbal abuse against a doctor, with a recent private settlement acknowledged by the complainant, seeking to quash the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute was private in nature, verified the genuineness of the settlement, and determined that continued prosecution was unnecessary.
Issues: Whether the FIR can be quashed based on the private settlement between the parties involved.
Ratio Decidendi: Based on principles from Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the court exercised its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings in light of the settled nature of the dispute.
Final Decision: The FIR against the petitioner is quashed.
ORDER
Dated this the 29th day of September, 2022 The petitioner is the accused in crime No.121/2022 of Kozhikode Medical College Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Section 294 (b) of the Indian Penal Code . Subsequently, the offences punishable under Sections 354A (i)(iv)(3) and 509 of the and also under Section 4 of the Kerala Health Care Services Persons and Health Care Service and Institution (Prevention of violence and damage to property) Act were also added by way of a separate report.
2. The prosecution case is that, on 04.02.2022 at 9 a.m., the petitioner abused the defacto complainant, who was a Doctor at NMCH Female Ward and thereby committed the offences. Annexure-A1 is the F.I.R. and Annexure-A2 is the F.I.S. submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 F.I.R.
3. Heard Sri. M.K. Sumod, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. M.P. Prasanth, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. C.H. Abdul Rasac, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent.
4. The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-A3 affidavit sworn by the 1st respondent is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 1st respondent had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent also confirms the same. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine.
5. The allegations would reveal that the dispute is purely private in nature. In such circumstances, by applying the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court inGian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [ (2012) 10 SCC 303 ], proceedings can be quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to continue.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure-A1 F.I.R.
submitted in crime 121/2022 of Kozhikode Medical College Police Station against the petitioner is hereby quashed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
