Appi @ Rafeeq and others v. A.K. Muneer and State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: K. Ramakrishnan
Judgment Date: 2014-08-13
Court Decision / Holding: This petition is allowed; the proceedings in C.C.No.361/2014 (Crime No.502/2013, Adhur Police Station) against the petitioners are quashed under Section 482 CrPC. The office is directed to communicate the order to the concerned court immediately.
Final Disposition: Petition allowed; proceedings quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Appi @ Rafeeq
Muneer M.A.
Abdul Haris
Sabid A.P.

Respondents

A.K. Muneer
State of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Adv. Sri.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri.P.V.ANOOP
• Public Prosecutor SMT.P. MAYA

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Kerala High Court criminal miscellaneous case filed by four accused in Crime No. 502/2013 of Adhur Police Station, which was taken on file as CC No. 361/2014 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod. The petition seeks to quash the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC on the basis of a settlement between the parties. The first respondent/defacto complainant is A.K. Muneer, and the State of Kerala is the other respondent. The offences alleged include sections 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 IPC. After investigation, a final report was filed and the matter has since been settled; the defacto complainant states he does not wish to prosecute and the parties have restored their neighbourly relationship. The petitioners’ counsel contends that, because of the settlement and the lack of any realistic prospect of conviction, continuing the case would serve no purpose, and seeks quashing under Section 482 CrPC despite some offences being non‑compoundable. The Public Prosecutor opposes quashing, arguing grave offences exist and that there is public interest to be protected; however, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab is cited to support quashing in private disputes where settlement exists. The High Court, finding no public interest in continuing the case and noting the restored harmony, allows the petition and quashes the proceedings; the order is to be communicated to the trial court.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)Sections 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab – principle that private disputes with settlement and no public interest may be quashed under section 482 CrPC to restore harmony

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that a settlement has been reached between the accused and the defacto complainant, restoring neighbourly relations. They contend that there is no realistic chance of conviction given the settlement, and, since some offences are non‑compoundable, they could not obtain relief earlier. Nevertheless, the settled state of affairs and lack of public interest justify invoking the power under section 482 CrPC to quash the entire proceedings and prevent wastage of judicial time.

Contentions of Respondents

The first respondent appeared through counsel and supported the settlement, stating no desire to prosecute and an interest in restoring relations. The Public Prosecutor opposed quashing, arguing that grave offences were involved and that non‑compoundable elements might preclude quashment; he submitted that the matter should be left to the trial court if possible, and that public interest must be weighed against private settlement. Nonetheless, the court was urged to consider public interest and the existence of a settlement.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab	2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)	Positive	Supreme Court held that in private disputes, where settlement exists and no public interest is involved, the High Court can exercise 482 CrPC to quash even if grave offences are involved, to promote settlement and harmony.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/22ND SRAVANA, 1936** **Crl.MC.No. 4361 of 2014 ()** **--------------------------CC. NO.361/2014 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD. CRIME NO. 502/2013 OF ADHUR POLICE STATION.** **......** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** **--------------------------------------** ## **1. APPI @ RAFEEQ, AGED 27 YEARS,** **S/O.ALI, KARAKKAD HOUSE, ADHUR VILLAGE, ADHUR, KASARAGOD.** **2. MUNEER. M.A., AGED 23 YEARS, THERUVATHU ORI ABDUL KHADER HAJI, MUNEER MANZIL, ADHUR VILLAGE, ADHUR, KASARGOD.** ## **3. ABDUL HARIS, AGED 31 YEARS,** - **S/O.ALI, KARAKKAD HOUSE, ADHUR VILLAGE, ADHUR, KASARGOD.** **4. SABID. A.P., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMED, PAYANGADI HOUSE, ADHUR VILLAGE, ADHUR, KASARGOD.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN.** ## **RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** **---------------------------------------------------------------** **1. A.K. MUNEER, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ABDULKHADER, DRIVER, RESIDING AT KALATHIL HOUSE, P.O. ADHUR, ADHUR VILLAGE, KASARGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT, KERALA-671 543.** ## **2. STATE OF KERALA,** - **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ANOOP. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P. MAYA.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **rs.** **Crl.MC.No. 4361 of 2014** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-** **ANNEXURE A- TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS WHICH IS NOW PENDING AS C.C.NO.361/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARGOD, IN CRIME NO.502/2013 OF ADHUR POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE B- TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 03.04.2014.** **RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:NIL.** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.S. TO JUDGE** **rs.** ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.** ................................................. Crl.M.C.No.4361 of 2014 .................................................. Dated this the 13[th] day of August, 2014. ## **O R D E R** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the petitioners, who are the accused in C.C.No.361/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod to quash the proceedings on the basis of a settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioners were arrayed as the accused in Crime No.502/2013 of Adhur police station, which was registered on the basis of a statement given by the first respondent/defacto complainant alleging commission of the offences under Sections 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C.No.361/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod. Now the matter has been settled between the parties. On account of the settlement, the defacto complainant does not want to proceed against the petitioners and there is no possibility of conviction as well. Since some of the offences 2 Crl.M.C.No.4361 of 2014 are non compoundable in nature, the petitioners could not file application before the court below. So they have no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following relief: “For these and other grounds to be urged at the time of hearing it is humbly prayed that this Honourable court may kindly quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.361/2014 on the file of the Hon'ble Judaical First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod in Crime No.502/2013 of Adhur police station (Annexure A) by allowing this Criminal Miscellaneous Case”. . 3. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the settlement, no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case. So he prayed for allowing the application. 4. The first respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties as all of them are neighbours and known to each other. On account of the settlement, their relationship has been restored and he does not want to prosecute the petitioners and he filed an affidavit stating these facts. Crl.M.C.No.4361 of 2014 3 5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction and he prayed for allowing the petition. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions as directed by this Court, submitted that there is no other case against the petitioners but grave offences have been incorporated and it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings invoking the power under Section 482 of the Code. 7. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the first respondent as defacto complainant a case was registered as Crime No.502/2013 of Adhur police station against the petitioners alleging offences under Sections 341,323, and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation, Annexure A final report was filed, which was taken on file as C.C.No.361/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasragod. Now the matter has been settled between the parties. It is mentioned in the affidavit that both the petitioners and the first respondent are neighbours and now the matter has been settled between the parties due to intervention of well wishers of both the parties and their old relationship has been restored. He had filed an affidavit Crl.M.C.No.4361 of 2014 4 stating these facts as well. In view of the settlement no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case and conviction in such cases will be remote as neither the defacto complainant nor his witnesses will support the case of the prosecution. 8. Further in the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab** (2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC), it has been held that if private dispute between two individuals resulted in registration of crime and filing of final report and if that has been settled between the parties and there is no public interest involved and on account of the settlement, the old relationship between the parties has been restored, then the court can invoke the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings though grave offences like Section 326 and other non compoundable offences have been incorporated in order to promote settlement and restoration of harmony between the parties. 9. In view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that the parties are neighbours and on account of the settlement, their original relationship has been restored and there is no possibility of conviction and it is a private dispute and no public interest is involved and keeping the case will only amount to wastage of judicial time, this 5 Crl.M.C.No.4361 of 2014 Court feels that it is a fit case where power under Section 482 of the Code has to be invoked to quash the proceedings in order to promote settlement and harmony that has been restored between the parties and pendency of this case should not be hurdle for the same. So this petition is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.No.361/2014(Crime No.502/2013 of Adhur police station) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod as against the petitioners is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately. With the above directions and observations, this petition is disposed of. Sd/- ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.** cl /true copy/ P.S to Judge Crl.M.C.No.4361 of 2014 6