Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SUNIL THOMAS, J
vs
CRIMINAL MISC. CASE 7864/2017
Quashing - Criminal Proceedings - IPC - Section 380 - The court quashed the criminal proceedings under Section 380 of IPC considering the amicable settlement between the parties and that the complainant had no objections to quashing.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, accused in a theft case under section 380 IPC, allegedly stole a bracelet from the complainant's child while the complainant was in the hospital. The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings citing an amicable settlement with the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the complainant's affidavit and oral instructions indicating that she has been duly compensated and has no grievances against the petitioner, supporting the decision to quash the proceedings in the interest of justice.
Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner can be quashed given the amicable resolution between the parties involved.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when a complainant expresses no grievance against the accused and an amicable settlement is reached, it is justifiable to quash the proceedings to promote justice.
Final Decision: Criminal proceedings against the petitioner are quashed.
O R D E R
The petitioner herein stands arrayed as accused in CC No.762/2017 of JFCM , Kunnamangalam Police station for offences punishable under section 380 IPC .
2. The allegation of the prosecution was that, 7/9/2017, while the second respondent, who is the defacto complainant, was in the hospital, the petitioner herein removed the bracelet of the child of the defacto complainant. Alleging the commission of crime, the complaint was laid and the petitioner was arrested. She is in custody since then. The petitioner has approached this Court on a premise that, the dispute with the second respondent has been amicably settled. To substantiate it, the petitioner relied on Annexure 2 affidavit affirmed by the defacto complainant.
3. The learned counsel for the second respondent affirmed the execution of the above affidavit and stated that the second respondent was duly compensated by the petitioner and she has no objection in quashing the proceedings.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, oral instructions have been received from the defacto complainant to the effect that she has no grievance against the petitioner herein and that the matter has been settled.
5. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, after the alleged incident, the petitioner herein was taken to the police station and two crimes were simultaneously registered against her. Regarding the second crime, Crl.M.C.No.7760/2017 was filed which was allowed by this Court. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner herein has got any other criminal antecedents.
6. Having considered the above, I am inclined to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner herein to meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly, Crl.M.C.is allowed. All further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1(CCNo.762/2017 of JFCM, Kunnamangalam) stands quashed. The petitioner shall be released from jail if her presence is not required in connection with any other crime.
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
