Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 15213
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 1574 OF 2024 CRIME NO.2206/2017 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM IN CC NO.877 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 5: 1 SHARANYA AGED 33 YEARS D/O PRABHAKARAN PILLA, PUTHENVEETTIL, THOTTUVA BHAGAM, PALLIKKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA, NOW RESIDING AT C/O ANIL, PUTHALATH HOUSE, NEAR NGO QUARTERS, T HRIKKAKKARA, ERAKULAM, PIN – 682021 2 SANDEEP AGED 34 YEARS S/O MOHANAN, SUMANGALA HOUSE, OLAVEPPU P.O. POOCHAKKAL, THAIKKATTUSSERY, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688528 3 VAISAKH AGED 32 YEARS S/O SIVANKUTTY, UZHINJATTIL HOUSE, CHETTIMOOLA ROAD, NEAR NAVANIRMAN SCHOOL, VAZHAKKALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682021 4 SHARATH KUMAR AGED 31 YEARS S/O PRABHAKARAN PILLA, PUTHENVEETTIL, THOTTUVA BHAGAM, PALLIKKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA, NOW RESIDING AT C/O ANIL, PUTHALATH HOUSE, NEAR NGO QUARTERS, THRIKKAKKARA, ERAKULAM, PIN – 682021 SHYAM KUMAR AGED 31 YEARS S/O PRABHAKARAN PILLA, PUTHENVEETTIL, THOTTUVA BHAGAM, PALLIKKAL VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA, NOW RESIDING AT C/O ANIL, PUTHALATH HOUSE, NEAR NGO QUARTERS, THRIKKAKKARA, ERAKULAM, PIN – 682021 BY ADVS. C.Y.VINOD KUMAR C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL) P.M.MANASH RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031 2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THRIKKAKKARA POLICE STATION, THRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682030 3 BILAL AGED 37 YEARS S/O ASHARAF, PANATTEL HOUSE, NEAR KALAMASSERY GOVT. HS, THRIKKAKKARA NORTH VILALGE, THRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682021 BY ADVS. M.MAHIN HAMZA P.MOHAMED SABAH LIBIN STANLEY OTHER PRESENT: SRI. M.C. ASHI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of March, 2024
In appropriate cases, the High Court can quash criminal proceedings if the matter has been settled between the parties and no public interest is involved.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 482 - QUASHING OF PROCEEDINGS - SETTLEMENT BETWEEN PARTIES
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were accused of abusing and assaulting the third respondent. The petitioners filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against them, arguing that the matter had been settled.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the matter had been settled and that no public interest was involved in the case. The court also noted that the continuance of the proceedings would only be an exercise in futility.
Issues: Whether the proceedings against the petitioners should be quashed in light of the settlement between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Supreme Court's decisions in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another, and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another, which held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed all proceedings against the petitioners.
Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.
2. Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 5 in C.C. No.877/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad, arising out of Crime No.2206/2017 of Thrikkakkara Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 294(b) and 506(ii) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Third respondent is the defacto complainant. 3. According to the prosecution, the accused had, on 15.12.2017, abused the defacto complainant and assaulted him and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.
6. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653]. 7. I have perused Annexure-A2 affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the defacto complainant stands by the contents thereof. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.
8. Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No.877/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad, are quashed.
This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Jka/04.02.24. APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1574/2024 PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO. 877/18 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO. 877/18 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST-CLASS, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/INJURED PERSON DATED 22/01/2024
