CRL.MC NO. 10081 OF 2023

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA, ``` ## **`1945`** ``` CRL.MC NO. 10081 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.411/2015 OF Valappatanam Police Station, Kannur AGAINST THE ORDER In SC 439/2019 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, KANNUR ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5 (ORIGINAL ACCUSED NO.2 TO 6):`** - `1 ASHKAR M.P, AGED 31 YEARS MOTENTAKATH, PUTHIYAPURAYIL PAZHANCHIRA, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670561` - `2 C.P MUSTHAFA, AGED 50 YEARS CHERIYA PUTHIYAKATHU HOUSE, PAZHANCHIRA, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670561` - `3 SUROOR A.K, AGED 33 YEARS DARUL SUROOR, NEAR RAILWAY GATE, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670561` - `4 V.N.MAHARAOOF, AGED 43 YEARS V.N.HOUSE, NR. PAZHANCHIRA PALLI, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670561` - `5 RIYAS P.V, AGED 35 YEARS THOUFEEQ MANZIL, CHUNGAM, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670561 BY ADVS. V.S.MANSOOR AKHIL BINOY` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031` - `2 RAZIN K.P, AGED 26 YEARS, NAFEESA MANZIL, COTTONS ROAD, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR (DIST), PIN - 670561` - `3 JUNAID M, AGED 26 YEARS MOOPANTAKATH HOUSE, NEAR KATTILE PALLY,` Crl.MC.10081/2023 2 ``` PAPPINISSERI KANNUR (DIST), PIN - 670561 4FASAL K.P, AGED 26 YEARS, NAFEESA MANZIL, COTTONS ROAD, PAPPINISSERI, KANNUR (DIST), PIN – 670561 SRI.K.K.MUHAMMAD FOUZ ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT SREEJA V, PP ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.MC.10081/2023 3 ## **P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** **------------------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.10081 of 2023** ## **------------------------------------------Dated this the 12[th] day of December, 2023** ## **ORDER** 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 S.C.No.439/2019 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Kannur arising from Crime No.411/2015 of Valappatanam Police Station, Kannur. The above case is chargesheeted alleging offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with dangerous weapons and wrongfully confined the victims, assaulted the victims and the victims sustained injury. It is also submitted that the co-accused were already acquitted and the matter is also settled. Crl.MC.10081/2023 4 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 affidavits filed by the victims in support of his contention. The counsel 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** Crl.MC.10081/2023 5 ## **and others v. State of Punjab and another (2014 (6) SCC** **466)** . The apex court in 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 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_ Crl.MC.10081/2023 6 _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 noncompoundable 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.”_ 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. Crl.MC.10081/2023 7 Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. The further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.439/2019 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Kannur arising from Crime No.411/2015 of Valappatanam Police Station, Kannur are quashed. Sd/- **P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** Sbna/ Crl.MC.10081/2023 8 ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10081/2023`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` - `Annexure 1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO:- 411 OF 2015 OF VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION.(WHICH IS NOW PENDING AS S.C NO:439/2019 OF COURT OF SUB JUDGE-2, KANNUR)` - `Annexure 2 A TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW-1(CW-2) BEFORE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KANNUR` - `Annexure 3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN S.C 147/2016 OF HON'BLE ASST: SESSIONS JUDGE, KANNUR` - `Annexure 4 A TRUE COMPUTER COPY OF THE ECOURT PROCEEDINGS DTD: 22/02/2019 OF THE COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.P NO: 8/2019 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II` - `Annexure 5 AN AFFIDAVIT DTD:- 15/09/2023 SWORN BY 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/CW1` - `Annexure 6 AN AFFIDAVIT DTD:- 15/09/2023 SWORN BY 3RD RESPONDENT/CW3` ``` Annexure 7AN AFFIDAVIT DTD:- 15/09/2023 SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT/CW4 ```