NAZARUDHEEN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.401 of 2019 registered at the Parippally Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465 and 471 r/w 34 of IPC. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the third respondent. The first accused, who is none other than the husband of the de facto complainant, is reported to be no more.

(2.) Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

(3.) Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the third respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief sought.