The Public Prosecutor's discretion to withdraw from the prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C must be exercised in the interest of justice.

Headnote:
{'KEYWORD': 'WITHDRAWAL OF PROSECUTION', 'SUBJECT': 'Withdrawal of Prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C'}
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners were accused of offenses under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 283, 332, 308 read with Section 149 IPC. The Public Prosecutor filed an application under Section 321 Cr.P.C seeking to withdraw the prosecution, citing reasons such as the accused being youngsters, the injuries sustained by the police officers not being serious, and the withdrawal being necessary for ensuring harmony among the people of the locality. The Sessions Court dismissed the application, holding that the reasons stated were not legally sustainable.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Public Prosecutor had not applied his mind properly while submitting the application for withdrawal of the prosecution. The court found that the reasons cited by the Public Prosecutor, such as the accused being youngsters and the need to ensure harmony among the people of the locality, were not legally sustainable. The court also noted that the injured persons had submitted written objections to the application for withdrawal of the prosecution and had stoutly opposed the said prayer.
Issues: Whether the Public Prosecutor had properly applied his mind while submitting the application for withdrawal of the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Public Prosecutor has the discretion to withdraw from the prosecution under Section 321 Cr.P.C, but this discretion must be exercised in the interest of justice. The court further held that the reasons cited by the Public Prosecutor for withdrawal of the prosecution were not legally sustainable and that the learned Sessions Judge had not erred in dismissing the application.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the Crl.M.C. and confirmed the order passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Kozhikode in Crl.M.P.No.1677 of 2017 in S.C.No.731 of 2016.

O R D E R

The petitioners are the accused in S.C.No.731 of 2016 on the file of the Additional District & Sessions Court-III, Kozhikode. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 283, 332, 308 read with Section 149 IPC.

2. This Crl.M.C. is filed by the petitioners challenging Annexure-D order passed by the IIIrd Additional District and Sessions Court, Kozhikode, by which an application submitted by the prosecutor to withdraw the prosecution against the accused persons was dismissed.

3. The prosecution case against the petitioners is as follows: On 24.12.2015 at about 10.45 pm, while the Sub Inspector of Police, Vatakara Police Station along with his police party were returning after conducting investigation in Crime No.1272 of 2015 of Vatakara Police Station and when they reached at the place of occurrence, the accused who were eight in numbers, along with some other unidentified persons were seen obstructing the vehicles and other passengers. In such circumstances, the Sub Inspector of Police intervened and directed the accused persons to disperse themselves. But they did not agree to do so, instead, they formed into an unlawful assembly and assaulted the police party with wooden sticks. Three police officers sustained injuries. The crime was registered on the basis of the aforesaid allegations and after completing the investigation, final report was submitted by the police for the offences mentioned above. Annexure-A is the aforesaid final report

4. Later, an application was submitted by the Public Prosecutor before the Sessions Court, seeking to withdraw the prosecution, under Section 321 of Cr.P.C. However, as the aforesaid application did not contain any ground on which the withdrawal is sought, same was later withdrawn by the learned Public Prosecutor. Subsequently, Annexure-B petition was submitted by the Public Prosecutor seeking the same relief by highlighting the reasons such as; materials revealed from the investigation are not sufficient to ensure conviction of the accused persons, the accused persons are youngsters and the prosecution is likely to affect their future, withdrawal of the prosecution is absolutely necessary for ensuring the harmony among the people of the locality, injuries sustained by the police officers were not serious in nature, documents available on record are not sufficient to establish that the police officers were on duty on the relevant time and withdrawal of the case will not sent any bad message to the society.

5. As there were three injured persons, notices were issued by the Sessions Court to the said persons. They submitted written objections and thereby opposed the prayer for withdrawal of the prosecution. After considering all the relevant aspects, the Sessions Court dismissed the petition submitted by the Public Prosecutor as per Annexure-D order, specifically highlighting the reasons for such dismissal. This Crl.M.C is filed in the above circumstances.

6. Heard Sri.M.Revikrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Sudheer Gopalakrishnan, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

7. The specific case of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that, the decision in the matter of withdrawal of prosecution is the prerogative of the Public Prosecutor. He is supposed to examine the materials available on record and arrive at a conclusion as to whether it is necessary to withdraw the prosecution, in the interest of administration of justice. It is pointed out that, it is evident from the averments contained in Annexure-B application submitted by the prosecutor that, he has applied his mind. It was also pointed out that, in the light of the judgment rendered by the Constitution Bench of the Honourable Supreme Court in Sheo Nandan Paswan v. State of Bihar [(1987) 1 SCC 288], the court is not supposed to sit in appeal, on the decision taken by the prosecutor to withdraw the prosecution. The role of the court while granting cons

Click Here to Read the rest of this document