High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeCriminal Misc. Cases disposed; quashment of the...
Criminal Misc. Case Nos. 1802/2019 and 1809/2019, Thomas Varghese & Kannappan v. State of Kerala & Usha; Subhash, Saju Samuel, Thomas Varghese, Manoharan, Kannappan v. State of Kerala & Usha
Case / Petition Number:Crl.M.C.No.1802/2019; Crl.M.C.No.1809/2019
Neutral Citation:/null
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Alexander Thomas
- Judgment Date
- 2019-03-13
- Court Decision / Holding
- The petitions are allowed; Anx.A-1 final report in Crime No.1359/2013 (CCC 456/2015) and all further proceedings are quashed; Anx.A-1 final report in Crime No.1159/2013 (CCC 321/2015) and all further proceedings are quashed. The two Criminal Miscellaneous Cases stand finally disposed of.
- Final Disposition
- Criminal Misc. Cases disposed; quashment of the two proceedings and dissolution of continued prosecution.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Thomas Varghese
- Kannappan
- Subhash
- Saju Samuel
- Manoharan
Respondents
- State of Kerala, rep. by the Sub Inspector of Police, Mavelikara Police Station, through Public Prosecution, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi-31
- Usha, W/o. Karthikeyan, Veettil, Kottarkavu Muri, Mavelikara Village, Alappuzha District, PIN-690101
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • B. Renjithkumar
Counsels for Respondents
- • Smt. Ajithalakshmi Sabu
- • Sri. Saigi Jacob Palaty (Public Prosecutor)
Case Synopsis & Summary
This is a Kerala High Court quashment petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed in relation to two sets of criminal proceedings arising from two final reports: Crime No. 1359/2013 leading to CC No. 456/2015 and Crime No. 1159/2013 leading to CC No. 321/2015, both pending in the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Mavelikkara. The petitioners, including Thomas Varghese, Kannappan, Subhash, Saju Samuel and Manoharan, pray for quashing of the respective prosecutions on the ground that disputes between them and the second respondent (Usha) have been amicably settled, supported by affidavits sworn before the court and a mediation agreement dated 23.01.2019. The court cites Supreme Court decisions in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (and others), noting that in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, quashing of prosecutions is permissible where there is a genuine settlement and continued proceedings would be futile. On evaluating the materials, the court finds a real settlement and no continuing interest in pursuing the prosecutions; hence, it quashes the Anx. A-1 final reports and all further proceedings, disposing of the two Crl.MCs. The decision reinforces Sec.482 Cr.P.C.’s jurisdiction to secure ends of justice by ending futile prosecutions when parties settle disputes.
Provisions of Law Cited
Section 447 IPCSection 451 IPCSection 354A IPC (i)Section 354A IPC (ii)Section 294B IPCSection 34 IPCSection 143 IPCSection 147 IPCSection 149 IPCSection 427 IPCSection 482 Cr.P.C.
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Settlement between parties can justify quashing under Sec 482 Cr.P.C. in appropriate cases, including non-compoundable offences (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab)
- Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr (para. 29) supports quashing on settlement
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners contend for quashing of the impugned criminal proceedings under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. on the ground that the disputes with the second respondent have been settled amicably, evidence by affidavits and a mediation agreement. They rely on the Supreme Court’s decisions in Gian Singh and Narinder Singh to justify quashing where settlement exists and prosecution would be a waste of court time; the aim is relief and finality without continuing prosecution.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents’ position is grounded in the existence of a disputed criminal process; however, given the settlement and affidavits, they acknowledge that quashing is warranted under the Court’s exercised discretion under Sec.482 Cr.P.C., particularly in light of the settlement and the practical avoidance of further litigation.
Cited Precedents (2)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gian Singh v. State of Punjab | 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 | Positive | Cited to justify quashing under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. where there is a real settlement, especially in cases involving offences that are non-compoundable. |
| Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr | (2014) 6 SCC 466 | Positive | Cited for the principle that settlement can justify quashing, with emphasis on para.29. |
Diagnostic Tool
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 Criminal Misc. Case Nos. 1802/2019 and 1809/2019, Thomas Varghese & Kannappan v. State of Kerala & Usha; Subhash, Saju Samuel, Thomas Varghese, Manoharan, Kannappan v. State of Kerala & Usha 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 ALEXANDER THOMAS**
**WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940**
## **Crl.MC.No. 1802 of 2019**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 456/2015 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, MAVELIKKARA CRIME NO. 1359/2013 OF Mavelikkara Police Station , Alappuzha**
## **PETITIONER/S:**
**1 THOMAS VARGHESE AGED 72 YEARS S/O.VARGHESE, KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI HOUSE, KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2 KANNAPPAN, AGED 47 YEARS S/O.RAJAN, KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI HOUSE, KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.**
**BY ADV. SRI.B.RENJITHKUMAR**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
|**1**|**STATE OF KERALA,**|
|---|---|
||**REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA**|
||**POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH**|
||**COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31.**|
|**2**|**USHA,**|
||**AGED 52 YEARS**|
||**W/O.KARTHIKEYAN, RESIDING AT KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI**|
||**VEETTIL, KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE,**|
||**ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN- 690101.**|
**BY ADV. SMT.AJITHALAKSHMI SABU SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR**
**THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.1809/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:**
## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS**
**WEDNESDAY,THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1940**
## **Crl.MC.No. 1809 of 2019**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 321/2015 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, MAVELIKKARA**
**CRIME NO. 1159/2013 OF Mavelikkara Police Station , Alappuzha**
## **PETITIONER/S:**
|**1**|**SUBHASH,**|
|---|---|
||**AGED 54 YEARS**|
||**S/O.KUTTAPPAN, KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI HOUSE,**|
||**KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA**|
||**DISTRICT.**|
|**2**|**SAJU SAMUEL,**|
||**AGED 61 YEARS**|
||**S/O.K.C.SAMUEL, KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI HOUSE,**|
||**KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA**|
||**DISTRICT.**|
|**3**|**THOMAS VARGHESE,**|
||**AGED 72 YEARS**|
||**S/O.VARGHESE, KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI HOUSE,**|
||**KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA**|
||**DISTRICT.**|
|**4**|**MANOHARAN,**|
||**AGED 39 YEARS**|
||**S/O.AYYAVU, MAHESH BHAVANAM, KOTTARKAVU MURI,**|
||**MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.**|
|**5**|**KANNAPPAN,**|
||**AGED 47 YEARS**|
||**S/O.RAJAN, KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI HOUSE, KOTTARKAVU**|
||**MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.**|
||**BY ADV. SRI.B.RENJITHKUMAR**|
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
**1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31.**
**2 USHA, W/O.KARTHIKEYAN, AGED 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT KIZHAKKEPANAYANNAMURI VEETTIL, KOTTARKAVU MURI, MAVELIKARA VILLAG, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690 101.**
## **OTHER PRESENT:**
**SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1, SMT.AJITHALAKSHMI FOR R2**
**THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.03.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.1802/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:**
## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.**
================== Crl.M.C.Nos.1802 & 1809 of 2019 ================== Dated this the 13[th] day of March, 2019 **O R D E R**
The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.1802/2019 are the accused in Anx. A-1 final report Crime No.1359/2013 of Mavelikkara Police Station, based on the complaint filed by the 2[nd] respondent defacto complainant registered for offences punishable under Secs.447, 451, 354 A(i), A(ii), 294(b) read with Sec. 34 of the I.P.C., which has led to the institution of C.C.No.456/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikkara.
2. The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.1809/2019 are accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 in Anx. A-1 final report in Crime No.1159/2013 of Mavelikkara Police Station, Alappuzha district, registered for offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 149, 447, 427 of the I.P.C. based on the complaint filed by R-2 defacto complainant, which has led to the institution of C.C.No. 321/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikkara.
3. The defacto complainant complainant in both the cases are one person. It is stated that now the entire disputes between the petitioners and 2[nd] respondent defacto complainant in these two cases have been settled amicably and that the 2[nd] respondent has sworn to
Crl.M.C.1802/19 & 1809/19
- : 5 :-
Anx.A-3 affidavits in both the cases before this Court, wherein it is stated that she has settled the entire disputes with the accused in the above two cases and that she has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending against the accused in both the cases. It is in the light of the above aspects that the petitioners in these two Crl.M.Cs. have preferred the instant Crl.M.Cs. with the prayer to quash the aforementioned impugned criminal proceedings against them.
4. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case,
Crl.M.C.1802/19 & 1809/19
- : 6 :-
this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in _**Gian Singh** v._ _**State of Punjab**_ reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and _**Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr**_ . reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.
5. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that:
- _(i) Anx.A-1 final report Crime No.1359/2013 of Mavelikkara Police Station, in Crl.M.C.No.1802/2019, which has led to the institution of C.C.No.456/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikkara, and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused therein, will stand quashed._
- _(ii) Anx.A-1 final report in Crime No.1159/2013 of Mavelikkara Police Station, in Crl.M.C.No.1809/2019, which has led to the institution of C.C.No.321/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikkara and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused therein, will stand quashed._
With these observations and directions, the above two Criminal
Miscellaneous Case stand finally disposed of.
sdk+
Sd/- **ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE**
Crl.M.C.1802/19 & 1809/19
- : 7 :-
## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 1802/2019**
## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:**
**ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 15.11.2013 IN CC 456/2015 IN THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, MAVELIKARA.**
**ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT DATED 23.01.2019 BEFORE THE MEDIATION CENTRE SIGNED BY THE PARTIES THEREIN INCLUDING THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE ABOVE CRL.M.C.**
**ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.**
Crl.M.C.1802/19 & 1809/19
- : 8 :-
## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 1809/2019**
**PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:**
**ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 29/8/2013 IN CC 321/2015 IN THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, MAVELIKARA. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT DATED 23/1/2019 BEFORE THE MEDIATION CENTRE SIGNED BY THE PARTIES THEREIN INCLUDING THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE ABOVE CRL.M.C. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.**