Anwar Shaaged and others v. State of Kerala and Court of Kerala and others

CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 1 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **MONDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 13TH BHADRA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023** **CRIME NO.0896/2018 OF Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 1409/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 ANWAR SHAAGED 28 YEARSS/O. SALIM K, JAZ MANZIL, PARAKULAM, THAZHTHALA VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 691571 2 VISHNU G UNNITHANAGED 28 YEARSS/O GOPALAKRISHNAN UNNITHAN, KRA-51, KAILAS NAGAR, POOJAPURA WARD, SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695010 3 ABHILASH BAGED 28 YEARSS/O. K K BALACHANDRAN, MLR50, TC-9/1181-2, MANGALAM LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM WARD, SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695010 4 MANESH PREMAGED 27 YEARSS/O. PREM RAJ, LOVE DALE, KARAKULAM ARAMKALLU MAADVANA, KARAKULAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695043 5 SARAN KUMARAGED 32 YEARSS/O. SHIVASAMBU, VISHNU BHAVAN, ELANKATHUVILA, MADAVOORPARA DESOM, PALLICHAL VILLAGE, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695584 BY ADVS. SRIKANTH THAMBAN SRAVAN M.S. ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 STATE OF KERALAREPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 2 COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 PADMANABHAN RAGED 27 YEARSS/O. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, T.C. 41/305(1), AVITTOM THIRUNAL RESIDENCE, KURIYATHI, MANACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695009 3 VISHNUDATHAN M LAGED 28 YEARSS/O. MOHANAN, SREEMANGALAM HOUSE, THEKKEKARA, S.N. NAGAR, ARUVIPPURAM WARD, PERUMKADA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695126 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.T.R.RENJITH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 3 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** **-------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.6127 of 2023** **---------------------------------------------Dated this the 4[th] day of September, 2023** ## **O R D E R** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. The petitioners are the accused in CC No. 1409/2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Secs. 294(b), 341, 324, 323, 308, 506 r/w Sec.34 IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that the 1[st] and 3[rd] accused persons on the existing vengeance over the complaint being given to the Principal of the Government Law College, Thiruvanathapuram by the complainant had taken that against him when the complainant and other friends who came near CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 4 the bike shed near the gate of Government Law College, Thiruvananthapuram, the 1[st] to 5[th] accused persons stopped the complainant and used abusive languages and other threats against the complainant. After that the complainant was pushed heavily on the chest and kicked. Subsequently, the 2[nd] accused person had hit the head of the complainant with a piece of iron road. Further attempts by the accused person were dodged by the complainant, if not have dodged would have resulted in death. The 3[rd] accused had threatened and used abusive languages against the complainant and further used a stone to hit the chest, back, back of the neck and other areas and made him fall down. The 4[th] and 5[th] accused persons had stamped and hit the complainant. The 4[th] and 5[th] accused also pushed away the friend of the complainant who came to stop the fight and the accused persons had threatened the complainant and others. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavit filed by the victims in support of his contention. The counsel CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 5 appearing for the victims also submitted that the matter is settled and the victims have no objection in quashing the prosecution. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on the basis of the settlement. But the Public Prosecutor conceded that the matter is settled between the parties. 6. This Court has considered the submission of the petitioners, victims and the Public Prosecutor and has also gone through the records including the affidavits filed by the victims. 7. In **State of Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan and Others [2019 (5) SCC 688],** three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The Apex Court in _**Laxmi Narayan**_ 's case (supra) also relied on the law laid down in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [2012 (10) SCC 303]** and **Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another [2014 (6) SCC 466]** . The Apex Court in CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 6 ## paragraph 13 of the _**Laxmi Narayan**_ 's case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted hereunder: _“13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein above, it is observed and held as under: i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non - compoundable offences under S.320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;_ _ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;_ _iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;_ _iv) offences under S.307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.482 of the Code, on the ground_ CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 7 _that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of S.307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of S.307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under S.307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital / delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above;_ _v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement / compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.”_ CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 8 8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the Apex Court, this court perused the facts in this case and also perused the documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire facts and circumstances I am of the considered opinion that the dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be accepted. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners in CC No. 1409/2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram are quashed. _SD/-_ **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** SKS CRL.MC NO. 6127 OF 2023 9 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6127/2023** |PETITIONER ANNEXURES|| |---|---| |Annexure A1|THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN| ||CC NO. 1409/2021 ON THE FILES OF| ||HONOURABLE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE| ||COURT-III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.| |Annexure A2|THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST| ||INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 0896/2018| ||OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION,| ||THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.| |Annexure A3|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND| ||RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT STATING| ||SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE DISPUTES WITH THE| ||PETITIONERS HEREIN DATED 27.07.2023.| |Annexure A4|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE THIRD| ||RESPONDENT STATING SETTLEMENT OF ALL THE| ||DISPUTES WITH THE PETITIONERS HEREIN DATED| ||27.07.2023.|