High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2022-04-01CRL.MC allowed; final report in Crime No.819/20...

Akshay et al. v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Ziyad Rahman A.A.
Judgment Date: 2022-04-01
Court Decision / Holding: The Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-II final report in Crime No.819/2019 of Mannarkkad Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C.No.420/2021 before the Sessions Court, Palakkad are quashed.
Final Disposition: CRL.MC allowed; final report in Crime No.819/2019 and all further proceedings in S.C.No.420/2021 are quashed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

AKSHAY AGED 21 YEARS S/O. BHASKARAN
MUHAMMED FAYIZ AGED 22 YEARS S/O. HAMSA
JUNAIS AGED 24 YEARS S/O. BASHEER
MUHAMMED JAZEEL AGED 23 YEARS S/O. SUBAIR
GOKUL SURESH BABU AGED 21 YEARS S/O. SURESH BABU
MUHAMMED ANSAR AGED 23 YEARS S/O. HAMSA
MUHAMMED AJMAL AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ASHRAF
MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SAITHALAVI
MUHAMMED FAYIZ P.V AGED 22 YEARS S/O. HAMSA
MUHAMMED SUHAIL, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 25 YEARS
MUHAMMED SHEBIN AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ANAS.
MUHAMMED FAYIZ AGED 25 YEARS S/O. VEERANKUTTY

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
MUHAMMED ARSHAD aged 21 years, S/O.ABDUL BASHEER, KULUKKUMPARA HOUSE, PAYYANADAM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN678582
HISHAM YOUSAF aged 22 years, S/O. YOUSAF, POTHIYIL HOUSE, PARASSERI, THENKARA P.O., MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN 678582
MOHAMMED MAZIN O.P, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.MOOSA, OTHUPALLI HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678582
MUHAMMED SAVAD, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.MUJEEB, PALAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLAMKUZHI, TRIKKALOOR P.O., MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN-678582

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Adv T.K. Sandeep

Counsels for Respondents

• Adv Veena Harikumar
• Adv Ranjit George (Sr. PP)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The Kerala High Court, in CRL.MC 3957 of 2021, deals with a petition to quash proceedings in S.C. No.420 of 2021, arising from Crime No.819/2019 at Mannarkkad Police Station. The petitioners, twelve college students, are accused of offences under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 308, and 326 r/w 149 for allegedly forming an unlawful assembly and assaulting respondents 2–5 on 22 November 2019 inside Najath College campus. The petition seeks to quash further proceedings on grounds that the dispute is private and has been settled; affidavits from the injured persons (respondents 2–5) state they have no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing, which is confirmed by the respondents’ counsel. The State and the injured parties acknowledge the affidavits. The court notes that although offences like 326 and 308 are included, there is no permanent disability, the parties are college students, and the incident occurred within a campus, making continued proceedings unnecessary. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2012(4) KLT 108), the court invokes its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash. Consequently, the petition is allowed, Annexure II final report in Crime No.819/2019 is quashed, and all further proceedings in S.C.No.420/2021 are disposed of.

Provisions of Law Cited

Sections 143,147,148,341,323,324,308,326 r/w. 149 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings in appropriate cases
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 4 KLT 108 (cited as authority for quashing in private disputes)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the dispute is private and has been settled between the parties. Affidavits sworn by injured respondents (2–5) state there is no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing the proceedings. They emphasize the offences charged are within a campus setting among students, with no permanent disability and little likelihood of conviction given the settlement. In light of these factors and the settled nature of the dispute, the petition seeks exercise of the High Court’s inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, following the principle in Gian Singh, to quash the final report and continue no further proceedings, thereby conserving judicial time and resources.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents’ counsel confirmed the affidavits from respondents 2–5 and expressed no objection to quashing proceedings. They stress the private character of the dispute and the settlement, maintaining that continuing the prosecution would serve no public interest and would waste judicial time. Given the absence of ongoing grievance, they align with the petitioners’ request for quashing and rely on the settled factual matrix and Gian Singh doctrine to support the outcome.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another	2012(4) KLT 108	Positive	Cited as basis for invoking the High Court’s inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings in cases where a settlement between private parties exists and continuation would be futile.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Akshay et al. v. State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ## PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 3957 OF 2021 [TO QUASH PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.420/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.819/2019 OF MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION] ## PETITIONER/S: 1 AKSHAY AGED 21 YEARS S/O. BHASKARAN, AYNIPULLY VEEDU, THENKARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2 MUHAMMED FAYIZ AGED 22 YEARS S/O. HAMSA, KONGATH VEEDU, AASUPATHRIPADY, NATTUKAL, PALAKKAD. 3 JUNAIS AGED 24 YEARS S/O. BASHEER, CHELAKATTUTHODI VEEDU, NAMPIYAMPADY, PULLISSERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 4 MUHAMMED JAZEEL AGED 23 YEARS S/O. SUBAIR, PERUMANNIL VEEDU, KUTTILAKADAVU, POMBRA, PALAKKAD 5 GOKUL SURESH BABU AGED 21 YEARS S/O. SURESH BABU, AARIPPATHODI VEEDU, MUKKAD, KAITHACHIRA, MANNARGHAT, PALAKKAD 6 MUHAMMED ANSAR AGED 23 YEARS S/O. HAMSA, SAMBRIKKAL VEEDU, MADATHILKANDU, PULLISSERY, PALAKKAD 7 MUHAMMED AJMAL AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ASHRAF, KAMMATTIL VEEDU, PULLIKAL, KANHIPUZHA, PALAKKAD 8 MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 2 AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SAITHALAVI, MARAKKAMTHODI VEEDU, PAKULAM, CHEMMANNUR, THAVALAM, PALAKKAD. 9 MUHAMMED FAYIZ P.V AGED 22 YEARS S/O. HAMSA, PALATHUMVEETTIL VEEDU, PUNCHAKODE, THENKARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 10 MUHAMMED SUHAIL, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 25 YEARS NARAYAKADA HOUSE, NATTUKAL, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 11 MUHAMMED SHEBIN AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ANAS., KALLADI HOUSE, AAKIPADAM, PAYYANADAM, PALAKKAD 12 MUHAMMED FAYIZ AGED 25 YEARS S/O. VEERANKUTTY, AKKARA HOUSE, BHEEMANADU, NATTUKAL, PALAKKAD BY ADV T.K.SANDEEP ## RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 31 2 MUHAMMED ARSHAD AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL BASHEER,KULUKKUMPARA HOUSE, PAYYANADAM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN678582 3 HISHAM YOUSAF,AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. YOUSAF, POTHIYIL HOUSE, PARASSERI, THENKARA P.O., MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN 678582 4 MOHAMMED MAZIN O.P, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.MOOSA, OTHUPALLI HOUSE, KOTTOPPADAM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678582 5 MUHAMMED SAVAD, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.MUJEEB, CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 3 PALAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLAMKUZHI, TRIKKALOOR P.O., MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN-678582. FOR R2 TO R5 BY ADV VEENA HARIKUMAR ## OTHER PRESENT: FOR R1 BY ADV. RANJIT GEORGE – SR. PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 4 ## ORDER The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 12 in Crime No.819 of 2019 of Mannarkkad Police Station, Palakkad District which is now pending as S.C.No.420 of 2021 pending before the Sessions Court, Palakkad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143,147,148,341,323,324,308,326 r/w. Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that, on 22.11.2019 at 11.30 a.m., the petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in execution of common object, they wrongfully restrained respondents 2 to 5 and assaulted them with dangerous weapons. The petitioners as well as the respondents 2 to 5 who are the injured persons are the students of Najath College, Nellipuzha and the incident has CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 5 occurred inside the campus of the college. Annexure-I is the F.I.R and Annexure-II is the final report submitted by the police. **==> picture [430 x 15] intentionally omitted <==** petitioners praying for quashing all further proceedings in S.C.No.420 of 2021 pending before the Sessions Court, Palakkad pursuant to Annexure-II final report. 4. Heard Sri. Sandeep T.K., the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. Ranjit George, the learned Public Prosecutor for the 1[st] respondent and Smt. Veena Harikumar, the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 5. 5. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties have been settled and to substantiate the same, the injured persons/respondents 2 to 5 have CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 6 filed affidavits to that effect. Annexures-III, IV,V and VI are the affidavits sworn by them respectively in this regard. The aforesaid affidavits indicate that, the matter has been settled and the injured persons have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. They have also conveyed that they have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel for respondents 2 to 5/injured persons also confirmed the same. 6. It is true that among the offences, sections 326 and 308 are also seen incorporated. However, when considering the nature of injuries sustained to respondents 2 to 5 herein, it does not reveal any permanent physical disability. More over, the petitioners and injured persons are the students of the very same college and the incident occurred inside the campus. CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 7 Considering the fact that the parties are the students and also taking into account their future prospects, it is only proper that some indulgence be shown. Since the matter is already settled between the parties, it is highly unlikely that the prosecution would end up in conviction. In such circumstances, the proceedings of the trial court will be a futile exercise which would result in unnecessary wastage of precious judicial time. 7. Going through the materials available on record, it is discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioners herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view that going by the CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 8 decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108], this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-II final report in Crime No.819/2019 of Mannarkkad Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C.No.420 of 2021 pending before the Sessions Court, Palakkad are hereby quashed. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE pkk CRL.MC No.3957 of 2021 9 **==> picture [251 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** ANNEXURE I: A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.819/2019 REGISTERED BY MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DATED 22.11.2019. ANNEXURE II: A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.819/2019 DATED 12.10.2020 OF MANNARKKAD POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. ANNEXURE III: ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24.7.2021. ANNEXURE IV: ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 24.7.2021 ANNEXURE V: ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 24.7.2021 ANNEXURE VI: ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 24.7.2021.