Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14076
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 2921 OF 2022 PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 7:
1 VIJEESH KRISHNA, AGED 21 YEARS, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KANJANY DESOM, MANALUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, PIN – 680 612.
2 GOUTAM BALACHANDRAN, AGED 21 YEARS, SON OF BALACHANDRAN, PANDARAPARAMBATH HOUSE, MUTTICHUR DESOM, PADIYAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, PIN – 680 642.
3 ATHUL KRISHNA, AGED 21 YEARS, SON OF ANANDAN, VATTAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KANDANASSERY DESOM AND VILLAGE, KANDANASSERY P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 102.
4 SHINE CHANDRAN, AGED 20 YEARS, SON OF CHANDRAN, MANAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUNDATHICODE DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK, PIN – 680 623.
5 ABHIMANYU MOHAN, AGED 22 YEARS, SON OF MOHANAN, PULIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VAKA DESOM, ELAVALLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 511.
6 VISHNU, AGED 20 YEARS, SON OF RAMESH, ELANJIPARAMBIL HOUSE, THAIKATTUSSERY P O, EDAKUNNI VILLAGE, PIN – 680 306.
7 VIDHU KRISHNAN, AGED 21 YEARS, SON OF GOPI T K, THIYYADI HOUSE, POOTHOLE DESOM, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 004.
BY ADVS.
SAIJO HASSAN MEERA SEKHAR RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANAT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR WEST POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031.
2 ADHIL M A, AGED 23 YEARS, SON OF ANIL M B, RESIDING AT MELEVEETTIL HOUSE, VELUTHUR P O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 012.
BY ADVS.
SMT.SEENA C., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR M.NOOHUKUNJU SAHIB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 7 in Crime No.286 of 2022 of Thrissur West Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections506, 323, 324 read with 149 IPC and Section 4 of the Kerla Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998.
2. The prosecution case is that on 15.03.2022 at 11.30 am, the petitioners herein who are the 2nd and 3rd year students of St.Alosiyus College, Elathuruthu, assaulted the 2nd respondent as part of ragging. Annexure-1 is the FIR and this Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant thereto.
3. Heard Sri.Saijo Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Seena C., learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.Noohukunju Sahib, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
4. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-2 affidavit sworn by the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant also confirms the same. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine.
5. The allegations would reveal that the dispute is purely private in nature. In such circumstances, by applying the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], proceedings can be quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to continue.
6. It is true that one of the offences is under Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998. However, it is discernible from the records that the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant are not very serious. More over, in connection with the very same incident a crime has also been registered against the de facto complainant herein for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b) and 506 IPC. Crl.M.C.No.2942 of 2022 has been filed by the de facto complainant herein, who is the accused in the aforesaid crime for quashing the proceedings thereof. Both these Crl.M.Cs. are filed for seeking for quashing the respective FIRs, based on the settlement arrived at between the parties. In such circumstances, as both the case and counter case are being settled and the nature of allegations are not very serious, I am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., despite the fact that one of the offences is under the Provisions of the Kerla Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998. This is particularly because, the nature of allegation raised against the petitioners is a private dispute between the parties.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-1 FIR in Crime No.286 of 2022 of Thrissur West Police Station and all further proceedings thereof, against the petitioners are hereby quashed.
