Ajith, Thomas and Omana v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/28TH POUSHA 1938** ## **Crl.MC.No. 99 of 2017** **-----------------------** **CRIME NO. 1110/2016 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA** **-------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS 1 TO 3:** **--------------------------------** ## **1. AJITH,** **S/O. THOMAS, PUTHUKATTUSSERY THUMPOLY,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT** ## **2. THOMAS,** **S/O. JOSEPH, OUTHUKATTUSSERY THUMPOLY ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.** ## **3. OMANA,** **W/O. THOMAS PUTHUKATTUSSERY THUMPOLY ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.** ## **BY ADVS.SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN SMT.S.INDU** ## **RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT AND INJURED:** **--------------------------------------------** **1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.** **2. TANY, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. GILBERT ARATTUKULANGARA VEEDU, WESTERN SIDE OF VIKASANAM JUNCTION'THUMPOLI WARD ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 688001.** **3. ALICE, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O. GILBERT ARATTUKULANGARA VEEDU, WESTERN SIDE OF VIKASANAM JUNCTION'THUMPOLI WARD ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI E.C.BINEESH R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJESH** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **K.V.** **Crl.MC.No. 99 of 2017 ()** **-------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1110/2016 OF ALAPPUZHA NORTH POLICE STATION.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL** **-----------------------** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.A.TO JUDGE** **K.V.** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, V., J. -----------------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.99 of 2017** **-----------------------------------------** - Dated this the 18[th] day of January, 2017 ## **O R D E R ~~~~~~~~** - 1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code” for brevity) with a prayer to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioners. - 2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.1110 of 2016 of Alappuzha North Police Station. The aforesaid Crime has been registered at the instance of the 2[nd] respondent alleging offences punishable under Sections 354, 452, 427, 294(b), 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC. - 3.The 2[nd] respondent is the son-in-law of the 2[nd] petitioner. The petitioners 1 and 3 are the son and wife of the 2[nd] **Crl.M.C.No.99/2017** **-2-** petitioner. The 3[rd] respondent herein is the mother of the 2[nd] respondent. The prosecution allegation is that on 10.7.2016 at 11.30 p.m., the petitioners, with intent to commit house trespass, trespassed into the house of the respondents 2 and 3 and assaulted them causing bodily injuries. - 4.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the crime was registered in view of the strained relationship that existed between the parties then. According to the learned counsel, the 2[nd] respondent is none other than the son-in-law of the 2[nd] petitioner and they have decided to wipe off the acrimony that existed between the parties and to live in peace and harmony. According to the learned counsel, it is only just and proper that the proceedings be quashed. - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents **Crl.M.C.No.99/2017** **-3-** submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavits filed by them 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 submitted that the statements of the party respondents have been recorded and he has stated in unequivocal terms that the settlement arrived at is genuine. - 7.I have considered the submissions . 8.The position with regard to quashing of proceedings on the basis of compromise between the parties is by now well settled. In **Gian singh v. State of Punjab** [(2012) **Crl.M.C.No.99/2017** **-4-** 10 SCC 303] Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the 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.”_ 9.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: _xxxxxxx xxxxxxx_ **Crl.M.C.No.99/2017** **-5-** _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:_ _(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._ _xxxxxx xxxxxxx_ 10.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. **Crl.M.C.No.99/2017** **-6-** 11.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. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A FIR in Crime No.1110 of 2016 on the file of the Alappuzha North Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed. **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, V. JUDGE** Ps/19/1/17