Petitioners are the accused in Crime
No.694/2020 registered at the Palarivattom Police
Station for offences punishable under Section 418 of
IPC and Sections 43, 43A, 66, 66(B), 66(C), and 66(D)
Information Technology Act, 2000. The de facto
complainant, at whose instance the crime was
registered, is arrayed as the 2nd respondent.
Annexure-A3 affidavit has been filed by 2nd
respondent stating that the dispute, which led to
registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably
and she has no subsisting grievance in the matter.
2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,
who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners
have no criminal antecedents.
Having considered the gravity of the offences
alleged, nature of the injury caused and having
perused the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, the
contents of which are submitted to be true and
voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled
and 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.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure-
A1 FIR and the proceedings in Crime No.694/2020
registered at the Palarivattom Police Station is
Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, [email protected]