Quashing of proceedings under Section 482 due to settlement between parties and absence of continuing legal purpose.

ORDER

Dated this the 23^rd day of February, 2026 The sole accused in L.P.C.No.81/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur, arising out of Crime No.443/2011 of Pazhangadi police station, filed this Crl.M.C. under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 366 and 376(ii) of IPC .

2. The prosecution case is that the accused after promising to marry the defacto complainant took her in an autorickshaw to Mangalapuram on 05.09.2011 and at about 09.00 a.m. committed rape upon her and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, now the entire dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant was settled and therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The petition was strongly opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. Though notice was served on the defacto complainant/2nd respondent, she did not turn up. However, she filed an affidavit stating that now the matter has been settled with herself and the petitioner. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the defacto complainant had given signed statement to the SHO in tune with the averments in the affidavit filed by her before this Court.

6. On a perusal of the FI Statement given by the defacto complainant, It can be seen that the petitioner made friendship with the defacto complainant and as invited by him, the defacto complainant accompanied him to Mangalapuram and stayed over night in a hotel. During the said period they had physical relationship. Subsequently the defacto complainant came to knew that the petitioner was already married to another person. On a perusal of the FI Statement it can be primafacie seen that, the relationship between them was a consensual one. Moreover, now the entire dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant has been settled. In the above circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner as the same will only be an abuse of the process of the court.

7. In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in L.P.C.No.81/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur, arising out of Crime No.443/2011 of Pazhangadi police station, stands quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Sd/-