The court established that criminal proceedings can be quashed in cases of private disputes settled amicably, when further prosecution serves no public interest.

O R D E R

This Crl.M.C has been filed by the petitioners, who are accused in crime No.1510/2018 of Payyannur police station, seeking to quash Annexure A3 final report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.861/2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur which was registered under Sections 341 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC .

2. The prosecution allegation is that on 21.12.2015 at about 11.45 a.m., when the respondents 2 and 3 and other workers of KSU in Payyannur College was leading a procession in protest of an incident occurred inside the college campus, the accused who are the workers of SFI in the college obstructed the procession and assaulted the respondent No.2 with hands, causing minor and simple injuries and the 3rd respondent fell down during the commotion and thereby petitioners committed the above offence.

3. Heard the counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the first respondent/State, and also the counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

4. According to the petitioners, the crime has been registered under Sections 341 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC . It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the matter has been settled between the parties. The defacto complainant and the other injured had filed separate affidavits duly sworn in by them. Annexure A4 and A5 are the affidavits sworn in by the defacto complainant and the other injured.

5. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant also submitted that the dispute between the parties have been amicably settled and he has no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor on instruction would submit that the case has been amicably settled with the petitioners. In Annexure A4 and A5 affidavits sworn in by the defacto complainant/second and third respondents, they have categorically stated that they have settled the matter with the petitioners pending before the Family Court as CC.No.861/2019 pending before JFCM, Payyannur.

7. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another ( 2012 (10) SCC 303 : 2012 KHC 4530) a three Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 has held that criminal cases having civil flavour and arising from criminal financial merchantile, civil, partnership, matrimony relating to dowry or family disputes where wrong is private or personal in nature can be quashed in view of the settlement between the parties. Paragraph 57 of the said decision is relevant in this context to be extracted which reads as follows :-

“The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed b