Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 3130
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.HARIPAL, J
NIHANSHA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC/4419/2021
K. REEHA KHADER, P.K. SUBHASH SR. PP - SRI. HRITHWIK C.S.
Settlement between parties in criminal cases can lead to quashing of proceedings, especially when no serious injury is involved.
Headnote:
Quashing - IPC - 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308, 149 - The court quashed the proceedings against the petitioners based on the settlement reached between the injured party and the petitioners, emphasizing that no serious injuries were sustained and public interest was not hampered.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners faced allegations of violent assault under several sections of the IPC related to an incident during the Loksabha Elections. The injured party stated he had settled the matter and wished to quash the proceedings.
Issues: Whether the proceedings against the petitioners should be quashed based on the settlement with the injured party.
Ratio Decidendi: Settlement between the parties and absence of serious injury justified the quashing of the proceedings as it did not affect public interest.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings against the petitioners.
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused in S.C.No.897/2020 pending before the Additional Assistant Sessions Court-II, Kozhikkode, where they face allegations under Section 143 , 147, 148 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the IPC . The alleged incident had happened during the eve of the Loksabha Elections, on 21.04.2019. It is alleged that the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention had attacked and injured CW1, who is the second respondent with a wooden stick and caused him injuries.
2. Even though the crime was registered incorporating offence under Section 326 of the IPC as well, later during the course of investigation Section 326 of the was deleted and now petitioners face allegations under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the . The petitioners have moved this Court for quashing the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C on the premise that the mater stands settled with the second respondent, the injured. In support of the said claim, they have relied on the affidavit of the second respondent as well, where he has stated that he has no objection in quashing the proceedings, that at the intervention of well wishers and relatives a compromise has been reached and he does not want to continue the proceedings.
3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
4. It does not seem that the second respondent had sustained any serious injury in the incident. It also seems that it was a election related dispute between the petitioners and the second respondent, which stands settled.
5. Even though Section 308 of the IPC also is incorporated, the second respondent has not sustained any serious injuries and therefore, by settling the matter no public interest is hampered. Thus the petition for quashing the proceedings can be allowed and the entire proceedings in S.C.No.897/2020 pending before the Additional Assistant Sessions Court-II, Kozhikkode are quashed and the petitioners will stand exonerated.
Crl.M.C is allowed as above.
