Amal P S, Kamal P S and Ashvajith v. State of Kerala; Gautham S Menon and Biju v. State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Ziyad Rahman A.A.
Judgment Date: 2022-06-16
Court Decision / Holding: Crl.M.Cs are allowed. Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.466/2022 of Aluva Police Station and further proceeding thereon, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Final Disposition: FIR quashed and further proceedings against petitioners quashed; matter disposed in petitioners' favour under 482 CrPC.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Amal P S; Kamal P S; Ashvajith; Gautham S Menon; Biju

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala; Kailas M.S; Ubaidu Ibnu

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Thomas J. Anakkallunkal; Abishek Johny; Jayaraman S. Nirmal Cheriyan Vargheese

Counsels for Respondents

• Arun Chandran; Sudheer Gopalakrishnan (PP)

Case Synopsis & Summary

Two Criminal Miscellaneous Cases (Crl.M.C. Nos. 2689 of 2022 and 3198 of 2022) were heard together challenging the proceedings arising from Crime No. 466/2022 of Aluva Police Station under sections 294(b), 341, 323, 308 read with 34 IPC. The petitioners–accused Nos. 1–3 in the first petition and Nos. 4–5 in the second–alleged assault on the 2nd and 3rd respondents on 06.04.2021 at about 3:50 p.m., resulting in injuries. The grounds for quashing are that the dispute between the parties is private and have been settled, as evidenced by affidavits A2 and A3 sworn by the injured respondents, who stated they have no subsisting grievance and do not object to quashing. The SHO verified the settlement, and the State prosecutor confirmed the verification. The court noted the private nature of the dispute and, following the principle in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, held that under Section 482 CrPC, quashing is appropriate where the dispute has been settled and further prosecution would be futile. Accordingly, the petitions were allowed and the FIR and further proceedings against the petitioners were quashed. The order emphasizes that private settlements should be encouraged where there is no public interest at stake. Appendices include the FIR and affidavits.

Provisions of Law Cited

Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 308 read with Section 34 IPCSection 482 CrPC (power to quash)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, 2012(4) KLT 108 – Quashing of criminal proceedings in private settlement cases under CrPC 482 when no public interest is involved.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended that the dispute with the injured respondents is private, evidenced by affidavits of the injured parties stating no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing. On this basis, they sought to invoke the High Court’s powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all further proceedings, arguing that the continued prosecution would be futile given the settlement.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents (injured persons) supported the settlement; they and the State’s counsel verified the settlement through the SHO and stated there was no subsisting grievance, thereby aligning with the petitioners’ aim to quash proceedings as no public interest would be served by continuing the case.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another	2012(4) KLT 108	Positive	Court relied on this decision to exercise 482 CrPC powers to quash where a private settlement exists and no public interest requires continuation.

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.** **THURSDAY, THE 16[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1944** **CRL.MC NO. 2689 OF 2022** **CRIME NO. 466/2022 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION.** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** 1 AMAL P S, S/O SAJEEVAM P C, AGED 25 YEARS, PUTHUMANA HOUSE, BYPASS JUNCTION, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM -683101 2 KAMAL P S, S/O SAJEEVAM P C, AGED 28 YEARS, PUTHUMANA HOUSE, BYPASS JUNCTION, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM -683101 3 ASHVAJITH, S/O RENISH N R, AGED 23 YEARS, ATHAM, GREEN VALLEY BYE LANE 2, ALUVA, ASSISI, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM -683101 BY ADVS. THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL ABISHEK JOHNY JAYARAMAN S. NIRMAL CHERIYAN VARGHESE ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031. 2 KAILAS MS,S/O SASIDHARAN, AGED 24 YEARS MARAMUTTATHU HOUSE, MANAPPURAM ROAD, THOTTAKKATTUKARA P.O, ALUVA, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, KERALA -683101, 2 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 3 UBAIDU IBNU,S/O ABDUL KAREEM, AGED 32 YEARS MANGATTUPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O, PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM -683520, BY ADV ARUN CHANDRAN Adv Sudheer Gopalakrishnan-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.06.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3198/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 3 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 # **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 16[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 26TH JYAISHTA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 3198 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** 1 1. GAUTHAM S MENON AGED 23 YEARS S/O SUNIL KUMAR, KOVILAKAM HOUSE, WEST VELIYATHUNAD, KARUMALLOOR, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM - 683511, 2 2. BIJU AGED 53 YEARS S/O THRESSIAMMA, VALIYARIYIL HOUSE, MATTUPADY, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM- 683108, BY ADVS. THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL JAYARAMAN S. NIRMAL CHERIYAN VARGHESE ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031, PIN - 682031 2 2. KAILAS M.S AGED 24 YEARS S/O M.K SASIDHARAN, MARAMUTTATHU HOUSE, MANAPPURAM ROAD, THOTTAKKATTUKARA P.O, ALUVA, ALUVA, 4 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 ERNAKULAM, KERALA -683101, 3 3. UBAIDU IBNU AGED 32 YEARS S/O ABDUL KAREEM, MANGATTUPARAMBU, MANNAM P.O, PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM -683520, BY ADV ARUN CHANDRAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.06.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2689/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 5 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 ## **COMMON ORDER** The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 5 in Crime No.466/2022 of Aluva Police Station. The Crl.M.C 2689/2022 was filed by the accused Nos.1 to 3, whereas Crl.M.C 3198/2022 is filed by accused Nos.4 and 5. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 308 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case is that, on 06.04.2021,at 3.50 p.m, the petitioners have assaulted the 2nd and 3rd respondents and caused injuries to them. Annexure-A1 is the FIR in both the above Crl.MCs. These Crl.MCs are filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to thereto. 3. Heard Sri.Thomas J Anakkallunkal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the above Crl.MCs, Sri. Sudheer Gopalakrishnan, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri. Arun Chandran, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3. 6 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 4. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the injured persons have filed affidavits Annexures-A2 and A3 respectively in both the above cases, which were sworn by them. 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 the respondents Nos. 2 and 3/injured persons also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the injured persons have reiterated that, they do not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. 5. 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 7 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 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 decision in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108],** these are fit cases in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked. Accordingly, these Crl.M.Cs. are allowed. Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.466/2022 of Aluva Police Station and further proceeding thereon, as against the petitioners are hereby quashed. Sd/- **ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE** rpk 8 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3198/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.466/2022 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM Annexure A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY 3RD RESPONDENT 9 Crl.M.C Nos.2689 and 3198 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2689/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES |Annexure A1|TRUE COPY OF FIR NO.466/2022 OF ALUVA| |---|---| ||POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM| |Annexure A2|AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT| |Annexure A3|AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT|