IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3289 of 2008()
1. JOHNSON,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. BINDU, AGED 30 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SMT.K.S.SAIRA
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :16/09/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 16th day of September, 2008
O R D E R
The petitioner, against whom a crime has been registered
alleging offences punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and
Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has
come before this Court now along with the defacto complainant,
a woman aged about 30 years, with a request that the crime
registered against the petitioner may be quashed invoking the
extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The petitioner belongs to the Christian community and the
second respondent belongs to Scheduled Caste community.
2. The crux of the allegations raised in the F.I. Statement
is that there was intimacy and pre-marital sexual intercourses
between the second respondent and the petitioner herein. They
lived as husband and wife. She became pregnant. The
pregnancy was aborted. Later, the petitioner started absconding.
He did not stand by his commitment to marry the second
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
2
respondent. Later, it was revealed that he had already been married.
Long after the alleged forcible sexual intercourse and the aborting of
the pregnancy, a complaint was filed before the police in February,
2007 and it is on the basis of such complaint that the F.I.R. has been
registered.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
allegations raised in the F.I.R. even if accepted in toto do not reveal
any offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. or under Section 3(1)
(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. A plain reading of
the averments in the F.I.R. must convince this court that it was a case
of voluntary sexual intercourses between two adult individuals of
opposite sex. In these circumstances the very registration of the crime
is not justified, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in any view
of the matter the second respondent has now realised her folly and has
settled the disputes with the petitioner. She has compounded the
offences allegedly committed by the petitioner. She has entered
appearance through counsel to confirm that the matter has been settled
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
3
between the parties and that she has compounded the offences
allegedly committed by the petitioner. A joint affidavit has been filed
by the petitioner and the second respondent duly attested by their
counsel to confirm that the disputes have been settled and the second
respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the
petitioner.
5. I am satisfied from the totality of circumstances that there has
been a voluntary and genuine settlement and composition of the
offences by the defacto complainant. It is unnecessary to go into the
question whether the allegations reveal any offence and whether on
that reason the F.I.R. deserves to be quashed. It is evident that the
disputes have been settled between the parties and the counsel in these
circumstances rely on the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State
of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19).
6. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor, who, after taking
instructions, submits that the Investigator is satisfied that there has
been a bonafide and genuine settlement of the disputes between the
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
4
parties and the State has no objection against quashing of the
proceedings.
7. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am
persuaded to agree that the request can be accepted and the crime
registered and all consequent proceedings against the petitioner can be
quashed invoking the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section
482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot
(supra).
8. In the result:
a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed.
b) Crime No. 49 of 2007 of Pavaratty police station registered
against the petitioner on the basis of the complaint filed by the second
respondent herein and all further proceedings taken in pursuance of the said
crime is hereby quashed.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
5
R. BASANT, J.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dated this the 28th day of August, 2008
O R D E R
The prayer us to quash a crime registered alleging offences
punishable under Sections 376 I.P.C. And Section 3(1)(xi) of the
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on the ground that the
petitioner/accused and the second respondent/complainant have
harmoniously settled their disputes. Invocation of the powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan
Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19) is requested . The
victim/R2 has not entered appearance. Counsel for the petitioner
undertakes to ensure that the second respondent enters appearance and
files a joint statement/affidavit to confirm the settlement and
Crl.M.C.No. 3289 of 2008
6
composition of the offences.
2. Notice given. Learned Prosecutor shall take instructions as to
whether the State has any objection against the invocation of the
dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot (supra). Call on 4.9.2008.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm