Back
2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 11566
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SUNIL THOMAS, J
SAROJINI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC/1856/2017
SRI.ABU MATHEW, SRI.AJU MATHEW, SRI.VINUCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RANJITH
The court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when disputes are settled and evidence for serious charges is lacking.
Headnote:
Quashing - Criminal Proceedings - IPC Sections List - The court quashed the criminal proceedings due to settlement between parties, indicating discretion under Section 482 Cr.P.C., highlighting the lack of substantive evidence for serious charges.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were accused of forming an unlawful assembly and assaulting the defacto complainant. A counter case was filed, but both parties reached a settlement.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the settled dispute and noted insufficient evidence for serious charges, particularly under Section 308 IPC. The Public Prosecutor affirmed the petitioners' non-involvement in further crimes.
Issues: Whether the court should quash the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. given the settlement between the parties and lack of evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's discretion under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was applied to quash proceedings when a settlement was reached, and serious charges lacked adequate evidence.
Final Decision: Crl.M.C. is allowed; all further proceedings are quashed.
O R D E R
The petitioners are the accused in S.C.No.687/2016 of the Assistant Sessions Court II A, Calicut arising from Crime No.255/2015 of Thiruvambady Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 452, 323, 324, 308, 427, 506 and 149 IPC . It was alleged by the prosecution that, the accused formed into an unlawful assembly, trespassed into the shop of the defacto complainant and assaulted him with a wood piece and granite piece with the intention of causing fatal injuries.
2. The petitioners contended that, they were attacked, for which a counter case was registered as Crime No.256/2015 for various offences and that the matter has now been settled between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3, who are the defacto complainant and the victims, submitted that, they have resolved their disputes. It was also submitted that, pursuant to Annexure A3, the matter was compounded before the Judicial First Class Magistrate. Learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to Annexures A4 and A5, which are the affidavits filed by respondents 2 and 3 referring to the agreement produced as Annexure A3. It was further pointed out by both sides that though offence under Section 308 is attributed, the ingredients of are not brought out in the course of investigation. It is clear from Annexure A1 final report which also stated that an attempt to hit on the head was made though it did not result in any corresponding injuries.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the petitioners are not involved in any other crime and that the matter has now been settled between the parties.
Having regard to these, I am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings. Hence, Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in S.C.No.687/2016 of the Assistant Sessions Court II A, Calicut stand quashed.
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.
The lower court case number “687/2016” occurring in the
1st line of paragraph 1 and 4th line of the operative portion of the final order dated 23/03/2017 in Crl.M.C. No.1856/2017 is corrected and substituted as “689/2016” as per order dated
06/08/2018 in Crl.M.A. No. 8008/2018 in Crl.M.C. No.1856/2017.
Registrar (Judicial)
