Abdul Latheef and Others v. State of Kerala and Kalamassery Police Station and V.I. Usman

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/9TH KARTHIKA, 1938** **Crl.MC.No. 6809 of 2016 () ---------------------------** ## **AGAINST CC 406/2016 of JMFC, KALAMASSERY ) CRIME NO. 833/2009 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** **---------------------** ## **1. ABDUL LATHEEF** **AGED:40 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMAD, KARIMBAYIL HOUSE, ULIYANNUR, KADUNGALLUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** ## **2. ABDUL KHADER** **AGED:49 YEARS, S/O BHUHARI, CHENNAMBILLY HOUSE, KUTTIKKATUKARA PO, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **3. MUHAMMADKUNJU AGED:69 YEARS, S/O HASSANKUTTY, NETTEKKADAN HOUSE, PONJESSERI PO, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **4. ANWAR HASSAN AGED:34 YEARS, S/O MUHAMMADKUNJU, NETTEKKADAN HOUSE, PONJESSERI PO, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **5. HARIS AGED:47 YEARS, S/O BHUHARI, MANNARKKAD HOUSE, ULIYANNUKARA PO, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **6. SHANAVAS AGED:38 YEARS, S/O ALKUNJU, PULIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ELUKKARA, MUPPATHADAM** **7. SAKKEER AGED:43 YEARS, S/O OORAN PILLAI, BANGALVILPARAMBIL HOUSE, PATTERIPPURAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** ## **---------------------------------------------** ## **1. STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031** ## **2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER** - **KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM-683104** ## **3. V.I.USMAN** **AGED:65 YEARS, S/O HYDROSE, VALOPILLY HOUSE, PUTHUPALLIPURAMKARA, THRIKKAKARA NORTH VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682010** **R3 BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.N.ABHILASH R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.AHAMMAD SAHEER R3 BY ADV. SMT.K.AASHA R1 & 2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **Crl.MC.No. 6809 of 2016 ()** ## **---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES** **-----------------------** **A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 2/10/2009 IN CC NO. 406/2016 ON THE FILES JFCM KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 8/8/2016 BETWEEN THE 1ST PETITIONER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONGWITH HIS SON V.U.AFSAL** **A3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7/9/2016 IN RFA NO. 800/2014 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT** **A4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 5/10/2016** **RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL** **-----------------------** **TRUE COPY** **P.A. TO JUDGE.** **kp** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ## Crl.M.C. No. 6809 of 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated 31[st] October, 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ## **ORDER** - 1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings. - 2.The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 7 in C.C.No.406 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of 1[st] Class, Kalamassery. They stand indicated for having committed offences punishable under Sections 120B, 347, 365 and - 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the IPC. The 3[rd] respondent is the de facto complainant. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that on 13.3.2009 at 1.45 pm, the petitioners wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and abducted him in a vehicle and thereafter forcefully obtained his signatures on some documents. - 4.Heard the submissions advanced. Crl.M.C. No.6809 of 2016 -2- - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the 3[rd] respondent submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavit filed by him to buttress his submission. It is urged that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquility. Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony. - 6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported against the petitioners. - 7.In **Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303** Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the Crl.M.C. No.6809 of 2016 -3- High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows : _“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”_ 8.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court ## in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC** ## **466,** the pertinent observations which are as under: ## _XXXXXXXXXXXX_ _29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:_ Crl.M.C. No.6809 of 2016 -4- _(i) ends of justice, or_ _(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives._ _xxxxxxx_ _xxxxxxx_ 9.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society. It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise, persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak. 10.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings. Crl.M.C. No.6809 of 2016 -5- In the result, this petition will stand allowed. AnnexureA1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners in C.C.No.406 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of 1[st] Class, Kalamassery are quashed. **Sd/-** **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE** kp/-1.11.16